POLITICAL CORRUPTION AND POVERTY IN NIGERIAN DEMOCRATIC STATE: ANY GROUNDS FOR JUSTIFICATION?

- ONUKWUFOR, MAXWELL EJIKEME-

Master’s Thesis in Applied Ethics Centre for Applied Ethics Linköpings Universitet

Presented May 2006

Supervisor: Prof.Göran Collste

CTECentrum för tillämpad etikLinköpings Universitet

1

TABLE OF CONTENTS:

Page

Chapter One:

1.1 Introduction……………………………………………………………........3

1.2 Ethical Questions………………………………………………………….. 7

1.3 Explication of concepts…………………………………………................. 8

1.3.1 What is Political Corruption?......................................................................15

1.3.2 Limitation of the Study ……………………………………………………16

Chapter Two:

2.1 Legitimate Political Structure …………………………………………......18

2.2 Trust………………………………………………………………………….22

2.3 Transparency………………………………………………………………..24

2.4 Conditions for Corrupt Practice: Seumas Miller et al’s Idea……………25

2.5 Summary……………………………………………………………………28

Chapter Three:

3.0 Moral Implication of Political Corruption ………………………………..29

3.1 Deontological Argument…………………………………………………….29

3.2 Utilitarian Argument…………………………………………………….......30

3.3 Virtue Ethics: Harm to Moral Character ………………………………... 32

3.4 Summary……………………………………………………………………. 34

Chapter Four:

4.1 Political Structure in Nigeria ……………………………………………….36

4.2 Corrupt Practices and the Nigerian Electoral System.……………………..39

4.3 The Moral Dilemma in Nigerian Politics……………………………………43

4.4 Any Moral Justification for Foreign Aid to Nigeria?

A Nationalist Perspective…………………………………………………......47

4.5 Summary……………………………………………………………………....56

Chapter Five:

5.1 Conclusion……………………………………………………………………....57

Bibliography…………………………………………………………………...........59

2

ABSTRACT

There is no gainsaying the fact that the “moral” problems associated with corruption in

Nigeria are the cause of poverty and hunger in the country. Political and economic inequality

have become the order of the day as Nigerians struggle for survival and proper means of

alleviation of these precarious situations. Proper understanding of the meaning of corruption

and its moral implications are important in order to find a remedy to the problems that go with

corruption. The demand for clarification of corruption and basis for its justification, “if any”,

calls for a nationalist approach to harness the potentialities that abound in Nigeria.

3

1.1 INTRODUCTION:

Many societies at one stage or another have witnessed cases of corrupt practices in one form

or another in their socio-political life, and even many more are susceptible to corruption1.

This is because some of them have experienced the effect of poverty that is associated with

corrupt practices at one stage or another in their socio-political existence, as a country or

nation. It is widely acknowledged that once the political system is corrupt, it will surely

manifest in different sectors of the society, thereby causing poverty and drastic reduction of

pace of development. However, there is no gain in saying that corruption exists in the socio

political institutions in Nigeria, both in her past and present existence as a nation.

According to the 1996 study of corruption by the Transparency International2 and the

Goettingen University; Nigeria ranked as the most corrupt nation, among fifty four nations

listed in the study, with Pakistan as the second highest. As events went further in 1998,

Transparency International corruption perception index of eighty five countries, saw Nigeria

come eighty one out of the eighty five countries ranked as most corrupt countries in the world.

Again in 2001 Transparency International corruption perception index, Nigeria went further

downwards by ranking ninety out of ninety one countries, with a second position as most

corrupt nation, with Bangladesh coming first.3

This statement by the chairman of Transparency International United Kingdom, Laurence

Cockcroft, in London, buttresses this claim that corruption exists in the country and

consequent to that, the country is on the high scale amongst the most corrupt countries in the

world:

Today’s Corruption Perception Index demonstrates that it is not only poor countries, where corruption thrives, levels of corruption are worryingly high in European countries…and in potentially rich oil countries, such as Nigeria, Angola, Azerbaijan, Indonesia, Kazakhstan,

1 Available at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_corruption visited on 24th May 20062 Transparency International, is a non-governmental organisation devoted to the combating of corruption, and brings civil society, business, and governments together in a powerful global coalition. They work at both national and international level, to curb both the supply and demand of corruption and in their effort to make long-term gains against corruption, Transparency International focuses on prevention and reforming systems3 The Transparency International Corruption Index, 1998 and 2001; pp.234-236.

4

Libya, Venezuela and Iraq.4

The question then is, why so much corruption in these countries and which institutions in the

society are the highest rate of corrupt practices witnessed?

In response to this question, in 2005, the Global Corruption Barometer report, by the

Transparency international, saw the political systems and their political parties as most

corrupt institutions in society. In forty five out of the sixty nine countries surveyed, political

parties were ranked as the institution most affected by corruption, especially with cases of

bribery, which demonstrates an increase from 2004’s results, where thirty six out of sixty two

countries listed their party systems as the most corrupt institutions.5

Basing my arguments on the reality of these results, garnered from the reports of the

Transparency International, in the corruption perception index and the global corruption

barometer, from 1996 to 2005, I came to the realization that there are “moral problems”

associated with corruption in general and bribery in particular, a form of corruption that is

prevalent in the political structure of most countries of Africa. This aspect of corruption

affects the electoral system of many developing countries of Africa, like Nigeria.

Thus, the problems encountered with corrupt practices as it concern bribery, in the electoral

system in Nigeria have continued, nowadays, in the Transparency International’s reports on

Corruption. In fact amongst the several reasons given for incessant change of government

officials in political offices in the country is the issue of bribery.

A lot of Nigerian politicians have deviated from their public role into making wrong choices

for their private ends; violating rules against political activities, which have had over years a

consequences on the country’s developmental process, and have, led the country into state of

poverty.

What is then, the meaning of corruption? The meaning of corruption seems elusive as many

scholars in politics and ethics have disputed amongst themselves as to what meaning should

be given to it, because of the various forms, corrupt practices have been manifesting in

societies and being exhibited by government officials in various societies.6 Up until now it

seems that a widely acceptable and encompassing definition that covers all its features is yet

to be announced. As the World Bank’s notion of corruption as an abuse of public office for

4 Available at http://www.transparency.org/cpi/index.html#cpi visited on 15th April 20065 Available at http://www.transparency.org/policy_research/surveys_indices/gcb visited on 9th May.6 Jain, A.K, The Political Economy of Corruption (Ed), Routledge, London 2001,p.12

5

personal gain err on the side of over simplification according to Quinones,7 Heidenheimer,

A.J’s, attempt at a definition of corruption, is too simple as well, when he posited claims

regarding the calculations affecting the gravity of corrupt actions taking place in any given

society. He argues that, “a corrupt civil servant often in this case a government official

regards his office as a business venture, the income of which he will seek to maximize

profitably to his own advantage. The office will then become a maximizing unit for him. The

size of his income will depend upon the market situation and his talents for finding the point

of maximal gain on the public’s demand curve”.8 To think of it, this definition by

Heidenheimer is more an affirmation of calculations affecting the rate or extent of corruption

existing in a defined environment and the ability of the office holder in finding areas of his

jurisdiction to exploit for his optimal financial benefit. It does not put into consideration, “the

moral environment”, “the moral state of the individual” and “the motivation for his corrupt

actions” and all other types of benefits (ends) outside financial benefits that may accrue from

corrupt practices, like quest for honour and fame, witnessed in abuse of power by public

authorities.

Nye, J.S, in his own definition gives a public office centered definition of corruption by

proposing that:

Corruption is behaviours which deviates from the formal duties of a a public role because of private-regarding pecuniary or status gains; or violates rules against the exercise of certain types of private-regarding influence.9

In Nye’s definition, we perceive a problem that lies in a “proper understanding of public role”

as he postulates it. The problem lies in deciding what a “private benefit entails and

encompasses”, judging by the differences in choices, actions and environment in which such

corrupt behaviour might occur. Not forgetting the fact that laws and the way they are

practiced in one society may not be the same or identical with those laws that exists in another

society, plus the way they are practiced. Consequently, there exist more often than not dis-

similarities of conditions under which corrupt practices take place.

7 See Quinones, E., What is Corruption? In the Financial, fiscal and Enterprise Affairs Directorate,2000 Available at, http://www.oecdobserver.org/news/fullstory.php/aid/233/What_is_corruption_.html visited on 28 May 2006.8 Heidenheimer,A.J. Terms, Concepts and Definitions: An Introduction, In Heidenheimer,A.J,Jonston,M,and Levine,V.,Political Corruption: A Handbook, New Brunswick,NJ,1989.P.99 Nye,J.S, Corruption and Political Development: A Cost –Benefit Analysis ,American Political Science Review,1967,pp.417-427

6

However, notwithstanding what we understand as meaning of corruption, and its constituents

which vary from country to country as a result of the differences in ways norms and moral

principles that guide and regulate societies are practiced amongst and within societies; and

putting into consideration the apparent differences in political institutions that abound in

given societies; the obvious fact is that corruption exists and they are not only illegal

behaviours, considering the extent the laws are contravened as they occur, but they also have

moral implications, which are more often, unfavourable to societies when they occur. We

shall discuss this moral aspect of corrupt practices when we look at the moral implications of

political corruption in chapter three.

At this point, let me note to the reader that a moral understanding and analysis of the meaning

of corruption is shown, as an ethics student, for a good grasping of the content of this work,

which will be looking at the possibility of pin-pointing the grounds for justification of corrupt

practices like bribery in a legitimate or “illegitimate” political structure, with emphasis on

Nigeria. This discussion is important to show the possibility of finding good justifying

grounds for giving foreign assistance to some countries of Africa, like Nigeria, where

corruption is manifest, in this era of globalization and quest for global justice. Worthy also to

be noted in this work is the claim by the nationalists, that developing countries as

communities have special duties and obligations of distributive justice towards members of

their community, in order to improve their living standard. This implies that these developing

countries have the capacity and the natural resources at their disposal, with which to use for

the building up of their “problematic” political structure and economic situation, for

eradication of poverty, and alleviation of sufferings of their people.

The question then is? Is there any moral basis to justify corruption in developing countries of

Africa, especially Nigeria? And, if we cannot morally justify corrupt practices, as I

consistently argued in this work, why would we then, justify the need and quest for foreign

assistance in form of aid, by developing countries of Africa, and the giving of aid by

developed countries in the name of global redistributive justice? Considering the fact that aids

have been given in the past and aids have been mis-managed with time. This can be deduced

taking a closer look at the brief statistics of aid in chapter four; the apparent level of hunger;

the poor state of environment and poverty that pervade Africa in general and Nigeria in

particular.

Let me now look at the three ethical issues that underlie this work as I embark in this

discussion to find adequate justifying grounds for my position and claims that corruption,

7

especially bribery that pervade the political system cannot be rationalized and justified at any

point in time. And that the nationalists’ position and emphasis for special obligation of

distributive justice amongst co-nationals could be a workable remedy for an eradication of

poverty in Nigeria caused by corrupt practices.

1.2 ETHICAL QUESTIONS:

To achieve this aim I set out by asking these questions and answering them in the various

chapters and sections of this work.

1. What is the meaning of corruption? And what are the moral implications

underlying the meaning of corruption? I will try to analyse the various meanings of

corruption by some authors in chapter one and argue in chapter three that different

forms of corrupt practices especially bribery, have moral implications. I will show that

Bribery, which is the most prevalent form of corruption, especially in Nigeria, has a

moral significance, and is capable of hindering the legitimate political structure of the

country. I will do this by first analysing in section 2.1 and 2.2, the nature and purpose

of any given political system, which is building Trust and ensuring Transparency in

purpose and in dealings with the members of the society. Trust and Transparency are

necessary for the smooth running of any political system and within the society in

relation to those who have been entrusted the power to rule the affairs of the people. I

will further pinpoint the problems with the Nigerian Electoral process as it involves

gift giving and bribery in chapter four. And the various conditions that necessitate

these factors to pervade the political structure in Nigeria in line with the conditions

and arguments of Seumas Miller, Peter Roberts and Edward Spence, in their book

entitled, Corruption and Anti-Corruption: An Applied Philosophical Approach.

2. Is there any moral ground to justify corruption? In chapter one, as I examined the

different conceptions of corruption to understand the concept better, I will try in

chapter three to find means of justifying corrupt practices. I argued that corrupt

practices cannot be justified in any way, following the consequentialist type of

arguments posited by Seuma Miller et al, that corrupt practices not only bring about

poverty, but are also illegal acts and morally wrong beheaviours that lead to the

despoiling of the character of those indulging in them and even those that support and

8

are in favour of them. No matter how we may rationalise or try to justify them, corrupt

practices have a consequentialist effect, as it undermines the legitimate process of any

political system, and have a bad effect on a nation as they cause poverty. I will also

use three important ethical theories as my analytic tool in chapter three for this

justification process.

3. Is there any Moral Justification for Foreign Aid to Nigeria? In chapter four I will

try to examine the possibility of any moral justification for foreign assistance in form of

aid to Nigeria, a country whose economy is constantly crippled by corruption. This

examination is important after being able to analyze; the different conceptions of

corruption in chapter one; the proper understanding of a legitimate political process

which corruption tends to undermine in chapter two, and the moral problems associated

with corruption in chapter three. I will look at the question whether Nigeria is entitled

to foreign aid in the face of incessant corrupt practices in government, especially that

constituted by bribery which is an index of corruption that pervades the system? Is she

entitled to foreign aid in the face of rich natural and human resources? I will therefore

try to analyze this in section 4.4 of chapter four, and see the possibility of such

justification, considering the conditions on ground so far. I will do this by postulating

the Nationalist claim.

1.3 EXPLICATION OF CONCEPTS:

POLITICS:

The definition of politics is highly contested. This is because a lot of aspects of social life are

so difficult to be identified under the political sphere, and it is often deliberated which sphere

of public activity, politics can be associated with. Therefore, it seems politics affects and

associates with all aspect of human life as there is dispute on what and what really constitute

the best approach to the definition of politics. For this reason, politics has assumed array of

titles that are associated with it. Titles like Government, Politics, Political structure and

political institutions. All these are umbrellas protecting politics as an area of administering

public good and welfare.10 In a descriptive definition, Politics will be defined as the practise

10 Ball, A.R, Modern Politics and Government (4th Ed), Macmillan Education, London, 1988,p.3

9

of the art of science of directing and administering states or other political units.11 It is often

assumed that it exists at the level of government and the state and must involve party

competition. Thus, this idea of politics is very limited in time and space to certain kinds of

relatively liberal, pluralistic societies, which allow relatively open debate. This is because the

definition offers no constraint on its “application on all spheres of life”, in those confined

societies where politics exists and manifests openly. A modern view applies politics only to

human beings who are able to communicate symbolically and make statements; those who are

able to invoke principles, argue and disagree with each other. The view holds that it occurs

where people try to disagree about the distribution of reasons and have at least some

procedures for the resolution of such disagreement. It cannot exist in a state of nature, like the

state in Hobbes theory, where there is disorder and no proper “rights” to do things for oneself

and for others.12 Here, politics encompasses all activities through which people make,

preserve and amend the laws; and the norms and moral principles under which they live. It is

inextricably related to the “phenomena of conflict and co-operation.” It brings to mind the

existence of conflicting opinions, different wants, competing needs and opposing interests that

guarantees disagreement about the rules under which people live.13 People by recognising the

need to influence these rules or ensure that they are upheld, must therefore work together with

others. This is why it is often shown that within the heart of politics is a process of conflict

resolution, in which conflicting ideas or competing interests are reconciled with one another

for there to be stability.

Andrew Heywood in his book, Key Concepts in Politics, postulates four different notions of

politics, which will help us understand my task as we proceed, since governments which do

not fulfil these requirements are considered illegitimate.

Firstly, Heywood identifies Politics as specifically the art of government and the activities of

the state. In this view, he sees politics essentially as an activity bound on the state, which

means that most people, institutions and social activities would be left out of the political

sphere, or regarded as being outside politics or not actively involved in politics.

Secondly, he views politics specifically a “public” activity that is associated with the correct

conduct and management of the community’s affairs rather than with the activities that

involve the “private” concerns of the individual. He believes, in line with Plato and Aristotle

that only within a political community can human beings live the “good life.”

11 The Concise Oxford Dictionary of politics, Oxford University Press, New York, 1996 p.388-389.12 The Concise Oxford Dictionary of politics, p.388-389.13 The Concise Oxford Dictionary of politics, p.388-389

10

The third notion is that he sees politics as a particular means of resolving conflict, which

could take the form of compromise and negotiation, rather than with force or naked power.

Politics here is portrayed as “the art of the possible”, which suggests a distinction between

political solutions to problems involving peaceful debate and arbitration or military force.

Finally, he associates politics with the production and distribution of resources in the course

of social existence. In this view, politics is about power, which is the ability to achieve a

desired outcome.14 Definitions, such as one and three, that relate politics to the art of

government, public affairs or peaceful compromise are based upon an essentially consensus

model of society, which portrays government as essentially benign, and emphasises the

common interest of the community. Whereas, those that emphasise distribution of power and

resources tend to be based upon conflict models of society that stress structural inequalities

and injustices.15

However, for the purpose of this study, I will always refer to the second and fourth definition,

that stress the need for distribution of power and resources, that tend to focus on conflict

models of society, that emphasize inequalities and injustices. They describe so well the

understanding of politics as it’s supposed to be practiced in any legitimate political structure,

according to John Rawls in his two books entitled; The Law of Peoples and A Theory of

people. Any deviation from this purpose makes the political structure illegitimate and

unpopular amongst the people.

CORRUPTION:

The actual meaning of corruption has been widely disputed. This could be as a result of

different forms of corruption and their features that vary from country to country in the way

they are practiced, and in the way which they consistently evolve in different political

contexts. Therefore to locate the basis of corrupt practices in any given political system is not

a straightforward task. We shall see this in sections 2.4 of chapter two, as I look at the general

conditions for corrupt practices according to Seumas Miller et al, and in 4.3 of chapter four,

where I will look at the conditions seen in the case of Nigeria.

In a definition by the Economic and financial crimes commission Act in Nigeria, corrupt

actions are those that involve, the non-violent criminal and illicit activity committed with the

14 Heywood,A.,Key Concepts in politics,Macmillian Press Ltd.,London,2000,p.35-3715 Heywood,A.,Key Concepts in politics, ,p.35-37

11

objective of earning wealth illegally either individually or in a group or organized manner,

thereby violating existing legislations governing the economic activities of government and its

administration and would include, bribery, fraud…money laundering, …and so on.16 This

definition emphasize the implication of corrupt practices as they violate the laws and norms

governing the society, and further identifies the motivation and end for corrupt action which is

wealth. Again an analysis of the Etymological meaning of the word corruption, which comes

from the Latin word “corrumpere”, interpreted as; to taint, or destroy the purity of someone or

an institution; to pervert ,to debase, or to spoil someone; or the quality of being corrupt or

exhibiting of corrupt beheaviour17; and the definition of corruption given by the BBC English

Dictionary as, dishonesty and illegal beheaviour by people in position of authority or power,

the corruption of someone being the process of making them behave in a way that is morally

wrong,18 brings us to the realization that the definitions recognise a fact that, certain features

are implicitly significant in corrupt behaviours, for instance that people are often engaged in

acts of corruption, which violate the laws of society and harm the socio economic life of the

people. They all recognise also the fact that the goal of corrupt actions are always for

monetary benefit. But then in a wider sense, we are led to understand through Seuma Miller et

al’s analysis of corruption, that through proper moral analysis of incidence of corrupt

practices, we can understand the moral significance of corrupt behaviours, say for instance, an

individual can comfortably engage in an act of corruption without involving other people, by

luring people into certain wrong practices, without himself having any urge for financial

benefits. Other benefits, such as desire for fame and quest for honour can motivate a person

for such corrupt behaviours. Miller et al further stipulate that benefits as such do not always

flow to the one engaging in it, as often implied by most definitions of corruption; benefits can

flow to other people related to the person engaged in acts of corruption, in one way or the

other. In their book entitled Corruption and Anti-corruption, an applied philosophical

Approach, Seuma Miller et al enunciates the fact that, to understand morally the concept of

corruption, as it affects the political system, we have to properly organise the political

institutions, and the laws and moral principles, to be well understood, specified and clarified.

Then emphasis has to be laid “on the people”, “their moral convictions” and “the moral status

of the people around them”. Then, finally “the ethics and moral principles that guide the

society” where they function. This claim implies that there is no point, to limit our

16 Available at: www.efcnigeria.org/publications13.html visited on 9th May 2006.17 Chambers Dictionary: New Edition, Chambers Harvey Publishers Ltd, London, 1993, p.383.18 BBC English Dictionary, Harper dollings Publ,1992,p.254

12

understanding of corruption, to the definitions that restrict it to “abuse of entrusted power, for

personal benefits, based on self-interest”, as most definitions imply. We need therefore to give

corruption a wider ethical reach which will enable us to interprete better the meaning and

occasions of corrupt practices. This process will go a long way to identify such wrong

practices as they manifest in societies if they need to be dealt with appropriately.

Now, the question is what is corruption according to the moral perspective? And, when can it

be said that an act of corruption has taken place? Senturia postulates in a bid to answer the

question that the best opinion and morality of the time should be able to examine the intent

and setting of an act and should be able to judge it to represent a sacrifice of public good for

private benefit, it is only then that an act can be held corrupt.19 For Senturia, a corrupt practice

like bribery will occur when an authority is charged with certain practice based on some

moral principles; involving monetary or other forms of rewards not legally or officially

provided him, induced to take actions which favour the giver and thereby damaging the public

interest.20 Friedrich in giving this definition retained an important moral aspect of corruption,

which is harm to the public.21 Another understanding of Corruption is that given by

Tarkowski.He argues that corrupt practices are not as a result of outcome of actions, but a

deeper problem with the structure of politics, and in the way power and authority are

exhibited in the society. For him corruption is however seen as an abuse, judging by the social

standards and moral principles guiding the societal system of public order, role and resource

allocation. For Tarkowski, corruption is any activity motivated by private interest, which

violates the binding rules of distribution which refers not only to the letter of the law, but also

to norms recognized as binding by society or to the system’s official norms and operational

codes. For him, corrupt activities are also those activities regarded by society as illegitimate

or seen by the power elite as contradictory to the logic of the system.22 Tarkowski refers not

only to patterns of beheaviour, but also to institutions in which corrupt practices take place.

Emphasis, therefore, is on the political institutions and environment that help to encourage

corrupt practices. The focus of this definition is not on specific actions, but on the standard of

ethical values of the political system of the society. If the institution is corrupt in the society,

corrupt practices will be facilitated in the environment, and assumed as a way of life by the

people. Further explicating these views the ethicists, l Seumas Miller et al elucidates that

19 Senturia, J.A.Corruption, Political; Encyclopaedia of the social sciences, vol.4, Crowell-Collier-Macmillan, New York, 1935, p.449.20 Friedrich,C.J.,Political Pathology, Political Quaterly,1966-Limited Government: A Comparison, Englewood Cliffs,NJ:Prentice Hall,1974,pp.70-8521 Arvina,K.J, The Political Economy of Corruption,Ed.Routledge,London,2001,p.1922 Tarkowski, J., Old and New Patterns of Corruption in Poland and the USSR,Telos,1989,p.51-62.

13

corruption is a highly immoral activity, but for them all immoral activities would not be

included in corrupt practices. They specify that, the act of killing someone for instance is a

moral wrong, but is not corruption. They affirm that:

At the core of different acts of corruption, corrupt actions have something

in common, namely that they consist of the performance of a typically habitual

act that is a despoiling of moral character or undermining of an otherwise

morally legitimate institutional process or purpose.23

Miller et al argue that a corrupt action will be performance of a typically habitual acts that

would go a long way to violate the moral character of an individual that engage in it as well as

undermining the morally legitimate political institution in which the action take place.

Emphasis should be laid on the fact that corrupt actions (a) consist of performance of wrong

acts that are habitual (b) Have a consequence of being able to despoil the moral character of

the person engaged in them (c) and being able to undermine the morally legitimate

institutional processes; whether political or economic.

If these three features are implied in corrupt actions, therefore, will corruption be morally

justified at any point? Is bribery which pervades many political systems be always

blameworthy? If we consider the legitimacy of institutions of which corrupt practices tend to

undermine and what constitutes legitimate or illegitimate political structure, one might argue

that there can be “good” that accrue from corrupt actions in some cases, if we put some

conditions that exist in some societies into consideration. Actions such as bribery given to a

public office holder who has no morally legitimate basis for his assumption of the role will

not be seen as morally bad, for it will be clearly overridden by so many claims, of which one

could be that of defending the right to life of the person who offered the bribe, since he knows

that the office holder has no moral basis for his existence in that position. (Refer to chapter

three)

Huntington affirms the need for some level of corruption as he posits that when we consider

growth in economy, the next thing worse than a society with dishonest government is one

with a rigid, over-centralized and honest government.24 In Huntington’s view, there should

not be a strict moral environment, since a form of corrupt practice, like bribery would help

break obstacles and improve governmental efficiency. But then, is this always the case?

23 Seumas, M,Peter.R.and Edward,S, Corruption and Anti-Corruption: An Applied Philosophical Approach, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey, 2005, pp.60-6124 Huntington,S.P.,Political Order in Changing Societies, Yale University Press, New Haven,1968,p.69

14

Since, in some developing countries of Africa, the stages of development have not reached a

point where such distinctions between harmful effects that constitute corruption and less

harmful ones can be made. These developing countries often categorise all forms of

corruption as morally wrong as they all lead to the undermining of their legitimate political

system and economy. To rationalize or speculate corruption the way Huntington puts it is

therefore, immoral and problematic because, perpetrators would find every means available to

evade detection, even when common sense tells them that it is morally wrong to indulge in

them, and that corrupt practices often have devastating effects on the economy. Corrupt

practices, therefore, no matter what form it takes will keep on lingering, if any form of it is

condoned within the social life of these developing countries. This is because there are no

adequate institutional mechanism for control, such as transparency and accountability in those

environments. The corrupt practices inherent to unsupervised financial systems have

contributed to the recent political and financial crisis in developing countries of Africa. The

bribery breaking obstacles in governance argument by Huntington in this context therefore is

insidious since bribes will serve to override institutional regulations and harm social aims and

institutional legitimacy. (Refer to my arguments in Chapter three) This argument by

Huntington is morally wrong because, by focusing on bribery, it fails to take into account that

bribery represents a theft of public resources for private end. These bribes end up being

diverted from treasury revenues, which impair stability. And the politician who receives the

bribe tends to siphon the funds to oversea accounts, without using them for productivity in the

country.

With our discussion so far, we understand that corruption exists and that the meaning of

corruption is identified in different ways, they are practiced and seen in the society; like a

community offering a bribe to a government official to influence his decisions to favour them;

a party member giving money to the party or to the people who are the electorate to be

nominated for political position and so on. These are all different ways corruption in the form

of bribery can manifest in any given environment, and through which we can identify bribery.

I will now try to give the definition and analysis of bribery, in order to show it’s implication

on the society and how it exists in the political system. What is bribery? John.T.Noonan

defines bribery as a morally deficient action, offered as an inducement improperly influencing

the performance of a public function, which is made to be gratuitously exercised.25For him it

25 Noonan,J.T, Bribes,Macmillan,New York,1984,p.11

15

is the payment in money or in kind taken or given in a morally wrong way. He elucidates that

bribery is a crime; a form of political corruption, which is considered unethical; implying a

sum or gift given which alters the beheaviour of the person in ways not consistent with the

duties of that person.26This definition, by the Wikipedia, sees bribe as a gift given with the

intent to influence a person to act in an “unofficial capacity”. It may come in different

varieties, like money, good, right in action, privilege, object of value, any promise or

undertaking to induce or influence the action, vote, or influence of a person in a public

office.27 This means that corruption in the political sphere that has to do with bribery is a

failure to comply with minimum moral standards, rules and norms enshrined in laws or

regulations, and loss of this innocence by a political office holder will be a process of

corruption relative to an ideal moral state of the system. 28If we claim that the case of bribes

are morally wrong, we put into consideration the fact that they corrupt the institutional

process, making them illegitimate; they have a corrupting effect on the moral character of the

bribe taker, and on the moral character of the bribe giver. We may conclude that the action of

a bribe given will be the expression of a corrupt moral character. Note that emphasis is on the

moral status of the individual who engages in bribery. Summarily, the act of bribery will be

wrong because it has a corrupting effect on one who engages in it, since the violation of his

moral character will lead to the undermining of the institutional processes and roles.29

1.3.1 WHAT IS POLITICAL CORRUPTION:

Political Corruption is defined as the misuse of public or governmental power for illegitimate

purposes which are, usually secret and for private gain.30 The kind of political system any

given society operates would be a major factor that will determine the occasions of corrupt

practices, depending on how weak or strong such institution is found to be, and goals it seeks

to achieve for the welfare of the people.

In Nigeria for instance, since May 1999 when she went back to civilian rule, the structure of

governance, and the democratic institution, which is supposed to be the government of the

people by the people and for the people, has become so weak, that the level of corruption has

26 Available at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bribe visited on 12th May 200627 Available at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bribe visited on 12th May 2006.28 Seuma, M, Peter, R and Edward, S., Corruption and Anti-Corruption: An Applied Philosophical Approach,p.429 Seuma, M, Peter, R and Edward, S., Corruption and Anti-Corruption: An Applied Philosophical Approach,p.630 Available at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_corruption visited on 12th May 2006.

16

risen tremendously.31 In political corruption, Government officials that are supposed to be

trustees of the common wealth turn into wolves enriching their private interest. They do not

only undermine their obligation, but also misuse the power delegated to them, for their own

private gain. A relevant question should be, does political corruption have any moral

implication? And in line with the moral analysis discussed in this work, I will say that

political corruption are morally wrong actions, like an act of bribery manifested by a political

office holder to undermine a legitimate political role, held by him. This is because bribery

represents a theft of public resources for private end. And the politician who receives the

bribe abuses his political office; since he tends to siphon the funds into overseas accounts,

without using them for any public good in the country .He exhibits a morally corrupt

character to undermine a legitimate political process.32 Here those in political office misuse

the power and authority given to them by the way they exercise their role in government, a

role which is supposed to be used to improve the living standard of the people. They turn such

a role for their private advantage.

In the political sphere of activity per se, we see such abuses in the electoral malpractice and in

vote rigging. Such abuses in the system take the form of bribery which is the means used by

politician to achieve their desired goal; here they have to offer bribes, in the form of money or

incentives to people in order to get elected to positions and occupy certain prestigious

political roles.

In chapter two, I will try to formulate a just political structure, to see how the structure can be

corrupted based on Rawls idea of public reason and the theory of justice in the society, as

shown in Rawls two great works; The Law of People and The Theory of Justice.

1.3.2 LIMITATION OF THE STUDY:

I will like to highlight to the reader, before proceeding to the next chapter, that this is a work

in philosophy, bothering on ethical issues that are highly controversial.

The issue of corruption is controversial in philosophical debates, because most definitions

given to it have not fully expressed the ethical implications associated with it, but often fall

under the problem of oversimplification, which often go too far to misrepresent the true

meaning of the concept. Secondly, the issue of global justice and foreign assistance has

31 Available at: http://www.transparency.org/cpi/index.html#cpi32 Seumas, M, Peter, R and Edward, S., Corruption and Anti-Corruption: An Applied Philosophical Approach,p.7

17

dominated the debate of most applied philosophical works that many people have consistently

argued the justification to give or not to give foreign assistance. I hereby want to,

acknowledge my recognition of limitations of this study.

Firstly, I think that the issues discussed here, as it concerns Political Corruption would

have been elaborately and scientifically handled by a political scientist and issues of data and

discussions about foreign aid done by an expert in economic issues. Owing to this fact, my

discussion on political corruption and data, especially on foreign aid may not be found very

systematically handled.

Secondly, the moral analysis and discussion on Corruption is an issue that not too

many ethicists have dealt with. Due to this fact, it has not been easy to get so many ethical

views about corruption in general and bribery in particular. Thus, this is basically the reason

why Seumas Miller et al’s book entitled corruption, and Anti-corruption: An Applied

Philosophical Approach is used extensively in this work, as most of the arguments and claims

made represent those of the authors.

Thirdly, this work relied heavily on internet sources for data about global justice,

aid, Nigerian situation and so on, as many books on these issues were not accessible to the

author at the course of writing. Owing to this fact, this work encountered great difficulty in

getting appropriate facts and figures about the issues mentioned above.

Be that as it may, the records so far points to the fact that, corruption has a moral significance,

which constitutes injustices that are witnessed in inequalities in wealth and resources in

Nigeria.

18

CHAPTER TWO

2.1 LEGITIMATE POLITICAL STRUCTURE

In my definition on politics in Chapter one of this work, I presented two important meanings

of politics by Heywood ,which I deem important to always refer back to in realising the aim

of this work, as the definitions are also in consonance to John Rawls ideas of the legitimate

political structure. I will argue here that the political structure of any country, in order to live

up to its expectation as a morally legitimate institution; instituted as a pubic activity,

concerned with the correct conduct and management of the affairs of the community; that is

not just for personal concerns of individuals; has to equip itself with a structure that is

legitimate. I propose that only within the political community, which is legitimately structured

that human beings can live a “good life”.

What is then, a legitimate political structure? And under what condition can a political

structure be considered legitimate? I, try to look at these pertinent questions and see how I can

proffer some answers to them. To define legitimacy of government, we can enunciate that,

legitimacy as is witnessed in politics is the popular acceptance of a governing regime or laws

as an authentic reliable authority. Legitimacy describes a system of governance, where the

concept government will be understood to have the wider sphere of influence on the people.

The word legitimacy therefore can be interpreted either in a normative or a positive way. For

the former, as emphasised by moral philosophy, something is legitimate if one approves of it,

and for the latter, which gets attention in political science, an institution is legitimate, if such

approval is general among those subject to its authority. This means that, the concept of

legitimacy as applied in this discussion, involves the normative and positive perspectives.

Here issues of legitimacy will be linked to those of consent, as legitimacy is considered a

basic condition for rule; without a minimal of it a government will collapse.33 From this

discussion we deduce that for any government to claim legitimacy over the people, it has to

first of all elicit the consent of the people, under the condition that it is capable of ensuring

equity and Justice to the society. Now, when we emphasise that the just and legitimate powers

of any government issues from the consent of the people, we would understand that the focus

33 Available at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legitimacy_(political_science) visited on 13th May 2006

19

is always on the word “just” and not just on consent, since citizens will willingly give out

their consent to a government that is fair and just.

John Rawls describes a society that is fair and just or legitimate, when he makes an allusion in

his book entitled; a theory of justice, that justice is the first virtue of social institutions, as

truth is that of systems of thought. He makes it explicitly clear that the primary subject of

justice is the basic structure of society; we cannot therefore, discuss the idea of justice outside

the society. Rawls further enunciates the characteristics of societies that can be considered

just and legitimate. That is to say that, for any society to be regarded as a legitimate society it

must exhibit some components that portray it as just. And because of the fact that some

societies are regarded as unjust, there will also be descriptive properties that make them that

way; properties like absence of distributive justice and existence of inequality. Therefore for a

society to be regarded as just, there must be a good distributive network and justice principles

guiding the way the resources are being shared and distributed for equality to be maintained.

Rawls continues thereafter to discuss the reason for inequality in society, caused by the

natural lottery in nature, and he proposes for a correction of these bad lucks in society, by

discussing two views on the equality of peoples:

One holds that equality is just, or good in itself, the law of people, on the other hand, holds that

inequalities are not always unjust, and that when they are, it is because of their unjust effects on the

basic structure of the society of peoples, and on relations among peoples and among their members.34

He proposes the need for Justice in the society and explains what his conception of justice as

fairness would mean in the face of inequalities. For him the guiding idea is that the principles

of justice are those that free and rational persons are concerned with to further their own

interests, and people would accept them in an initial position of equality, as it will define the

fundamental terms of their association. He posits that;

In justice as fairness the original position of equality corresponds to the

state of nature in the traditional theory of the social contract. This original

position is not, of course, thought of as an actual historical state of affairs, much

as a primitive condition of a culture. It is understood as a purely hypothetical

situation characterised so as to lead to a certain conception of justice35

34 Rawls,J The Law of Peoples, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, 199935 Rawls, J., A Theory of Justice, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1971, p.12

20

The parties in the original position have to decide which principles they would adopt to

govern their society. This original position is characterised to ensure that any chosen

principles will be fair, thus various forms of knowledge will be excluded. It will ensure that

the kinds of social co-operation that can be entered into by rational persons and the forms of

government that can be established will be such that no one is disadvantaged in the choice of

principles by the outcome of natural chance or the contingency of social circumstances.36 He

holds that this initial position is fair, and as long as its fair, the chosen principles to attain it

will be fair .He argues that it is necessary that the parties be ignorant of their social position,

class, natural assets and abilities including intelligence. People in this original position, acting

in their own interest would agree on the basic principles that all social values: liberty, and

opportunity, income and wealth, and the basis of self respect, are to be distributed equally,

unless an unequal distribution of all values is to everyone’s advantage. This principle simply

means that all persons have a right to an equal minimum standard of living, and that the

promotion of peoples well being in the state should come first before any other priority, and

that each person is to have an equal right to the most extensive total system of equal basic

liberties, compatible with a similar system of liberty for all. This means that since all parties

are in a state of equal ignorance about their own prospects, they have no reason to accept any

inequality of distribution, unless they are sure that everyone will gain from such inequality.

Rawls reiterated the justice principle, which states that: in a state of uncertainty, it is rational

to choose the option for which the worst possible outcome is the best among the entire

alternative. The practical implication of this principle of justice in a legitimate political

structure is that income and wealth should be redistributed through taxation, unless and until

any remaining inequality improves the position even of the worst off.

Rawls further explains the nature of consent that is given to a legitimate government in any

society with his idea of public reason. He also used this idea of public reason to discuss

further the notion of legitimacy of the political system. This Idea specifies at the deepest level

the basic moral and political values that are to determine a government’s relationship to the

citizens and to that of other societies.Rawls tries to examine and explain with this Idea, the

issue of public good as it concerns questions of fundamental political justice, in a

constitutional democratic society. Having noted this therefore, we can ask the question, how

did this idea of public reason by Rawls arise? According to Rawls, the idea of public reason

arises from a conception of democratic citizenship in a constitutional democracy, and for him

36 Rawls, J., A Theory of Justice, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1971, p.12

21

this fundamental political relation of citizens have two features; A relation of citizens to the

basic structure of society and, a relation to other free and equal citizens who exercise same

power as a collective body. These two features give rise to the question of how when matters

of justice are at stake, how citizens so related can be bound to honour the structure of their

constitutional democratic regime and abide by the statutes and laws enacted under it. For

Rawls,citizens are reasonable when, viewing one another as free and equal in a system of

social cooperation over generations, they are prepared to offer one another fair terms of

cooperation according to what they consider the most reasonable conception of political

justice, and agreeing to act on those terms, they do so at the cost of their own interests in

particular situations, provided that other citizens also accept those terms, as free and equal

citizens, and not dominated or manipulated, or under pressure of an inferior political position.

Even though citizens will differ in their conceptions of political justice they think is the most

reasonable, they will still agree that the conceptions of justice are reasonable.37Therefore, the

legal process expressing the opinion of the majority will be a legitimate law, which even

when thought not to be the most reasonable by all, or appropriate, will still be politically and

morally binding on all, as citizens and accepted as such, because of the trust and consent

given to the constitutional democratic government, and for the fact that the conceptions of

political justice satisfy the “criterion of reciprocity”.*38

What necessitates and binds the principle of justice as posited by Rawls in the political

society, which is composed of person’s deficient of comprehensive doctrines or theories of

the good? Rawls implies that the answer is Trust. He proposes that interpersonal trust among

the members of a reasonably just society and their trust in the institutional values, of the social

structures and political mechanisms, are at the heart of what keeps the society together.

Making a case for the principles of justice that form the core doctrine of the political

conception of society, Rawls relies upon the possibility of trust.39Ultimately, what seems to

bind the society together in Rawl’s view the value of civic life, and which has the ability to

sustain this civic life depends upon the existence of a civic virtue; Trust. In Rawl’s

perspective, citizens are not only capable of forming a conception of the good, but are also

able to acquire and act upon a conception of justice and fairness when they believe that social

institutions embody these conceptions, and they have reasonable assurance that others will do

37 Rawls, J., The Law of Peoples, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA 1999,pp.136-13738 *Rawls, J., The Law of Peoples, pp. 132-133. “(Criterion for reciprocity as Rawls puts it is understood as when a reason and belief for political power is sufficient for people to reasonably believe, that they might accept such reasons reasonably. This happens when everyone in society have sufficiently fulfilled their role, and the political authority being able to fulfil its role to the people)”.39 Rawls, J., A Theory of Justice, pp.144-145.

22

their part. These citizens tend to develop trust, transparency, and confidence in the society

where they envisage a just and fair arrangement. This is to say that citizens will comply with

rules and principles when they see other citizens complying with them.Thus, these virtues of

trust, transparency and confidence strengthen and develop, as formidable arrangement for co-

operation, ensuring that the basic political structure will remain successful.

Let us look at the meaning of Trust and Transparency, as they exist in a truly legitimate

political structure, if they would be relevant to the citizens of that society. Noting the fact that

if the political institutions in societies are found wanting in respect to these virtues, then, the

conclusion can be drawn that the political institutions are illegitimate.

2.2 TRUST

I have argued so far the importance of legitimate structuring of the political institutions, for

trust to be gained in the political activities of any society, since trust shown in the activities of

the political office holders by the people is a veritable tool in any political system for

development and success, as can be deduced in the understanding of legitimate political

structure by Rawls.

In general, Trust is defined as the belief in the competence of an entity to act dependably,

securely, reliably within a specified context, a belief which is influenced by the individual’s

opinion about certain features in the institutions in a society that are characterised by honesty,

truthfulness, competence and reliability.40 Political trust in particular, relates to the

relationships between a people and the political leadership and their political institutions.

Because of this relationship, political trust then becomes an essential feature in the

understanding of political regimes and their systems, and transcends to being a true way with

which we can assess an institution’s legitimacy or the legitimacy of the leaders.

This implies therefore, that Trust which is the relationship between the electorate and those

governing them cannot be undermined in anyway; otherwise the political institution will loose

its legitimacy. Democratic governments need trust because they cannot rely on coercion to get

citizens to comply with their jurisdictions, and also because they cannot always rely on

consultations with citizens all the time for permission to make important decisions. This

statement implies that political leaders cannot do what is needed which is right for the greater

40 Available at: http://www.pikolint.org/~clark/sites/trinity/nds106/trust_ia.ppt#257,7 visited on 14th May 2006.

23

public welfare without a considerable amount of trust by the citizens on them and on the

political institutions. Citizens will find it hard to trust politicians, the political parties and all

other political institutions if they fail to keep their promises to them for their interests.

How can political trust then be undermined? Naturally we understand that political corruption

is dependent on not only on abuse of power but on their immorality as they contravene the

moral principles; the moral environment and on the corrupt character of those in power, when

they abuse power. The existence of political corruption therefore, points to the fact that

political power can be abused and consequently that the defining element of the political

institution, which assesses its legitimacy, understood as trust, can be undermined accordingly.

This simply means that corrupt practices have an undermining effect on political trust as a

value in any political system.

Disparity of wealth and opportunity41, which political corruption causes are seen as unfair and

not contributing to the common good, but leads to lack of political trust. Consequently the

commitment by citizens to the political institutions and their conformity to laws and norms

will weaken, making it easy for the people to distrust the government by becoming

disinterested in the affairs of the state. This situation would be amenable through the means of

democracy as a system of governance in modern societies. Democracy in government is

important, to facilitate a proper distribution of wealth and separation of powers between the

Executive, Legislature and Judiciary. This is to say that democracy as a system of governance

has the capacity to limit and constrain power, bearing in mind the knowledge of the

importance of “democratic trust” in Democratic government achieved through distribution of

power and resources. This distribution of power and independence of the three arms of

government; The Executive, Legislature and judiciary is of paramount importance in limiting

and controlling corruption in politics through checks and balances, and in building of trust by

the people in the government. Again, the distribution and the independence of the arms of

government is imperative because the overriding of one arm of government over another will

always undermine the institutional mechanism of trust, say for instance the inadequacies of

the judicial system or legislative system will come together to undermine the trust mechanism

in the political system.

41 Seumas, M, Peter, R and Edward, S., Corruption and Anti-Corruption: An Applied Philosophical Approach,p.31

24

2.3 TRANSPARENCY

The concept transparency is commonly understood as government according to fixed and

published rules, on the basis of information and procedures that are accessible to the public.

Transparency is beneficial to “democratic governance” since free and open access to

information and elimination of secrecy is taken to be a prerequisite condition for the

prevention of corrupt practices and promotion of accountability, predictability and fairness.42

Countries with developing democracy introduce transparency as a means of holding public

officials accountable and fighting corruption, noting that corrupt practices would flourish in

secretive social and political environments. Transparency therefore, enables existing corrupt

practices to be brought to light and discourages other ones that are due to happen or due to be

engaged in by corrupt individuals. Seumas Miller et al propose that invisibility is often

present in instances of corrupt actitivities, which are embarked upon by rational individuals,

even though in morally depraved environments, agents may act in a corrupt manner openly,

considering the level of corruption in some developing countries.

We will notice that most times, government officials are aware of their corrupt behaviours and

their capacity to undermine the economy and increase poverty, yet they engage in them, and

the citizens who are supposed to oppose them tend to be supportive of them, because of some

benefits they derive from them. However, Transparency will succeed in eradicating corrupt

activities only if it exists against a background of widely accepted social norms. It is only

when the citizens of a country find corruption morally unacceptable, will its exposure to

public domain bring about the downfall of the corrupt. If the community has a high tolerance

for corruption or specific forms of corrupt practices like bribery then both transparency and

exposure of the corrupt will not necessarily be a powerful instrument to combat corruption.43

In the natural state of lawlessness of man as conceived by Thomas Hobbes, one can be corrupt

openly without any fear of the legal system because no moral or legal sanction exists. Here

everyone seeks to maximize his or her own self-interest under such conditions. Miller et al

affirms that, in the state of nature, socio-moral attitudes do not matter and legal sanctions are

not to be feared, therefore, there will be no need to hide one’s transgressions on their

account.44

42 http://public-services.politics.ox.ac.uk/transparency.asp visited on 14th May 200643 Seumas, M, Peter, R and Edward, S., Corruption and Anti-Corruption: An Applied Philosophical Approach,pp.43-4444 Seumas, M, Peter, R and Edward, S., Corruption and Anti-Corruption: An Applied Philosophical Approach, pp.42-44.

25

In summary, any legitimate political structure must have transparency as institutional

mechanism, for combating corrupt practices to be fully recognized as legitimate.

2.4 CONDITIONS FOR CORRUPT PRACTICE; SEUMAS MILLER ET AL’S

PERSPECTIVE:

Seumas Miller et al propose conditions that would be conducive for corrupt practices to be

prevalent in any given society, thereby ensuring the undermining of the legitimate political

structure. They argue that the condition of the environment, whether it is moral or immoral,

will be an important institutional determinant for combating or facilitating corrupt practices.

Moral environment, for Miller et al involves the socio-moral context in which corrupt

activities take place. Moral conditions for them consist of coherent structure of moral norms

that guide any given social group. These norms are understood as regularities in action or

omission, sustained in part by the moral approval and disapproval of the participants in a

given social system. The individuals in such social system might have differences in their

moral beliefs and worldview, for they might interpret the social norms differently which will

obviously lead to variations in practicing the social norms. For instance, many people will

have the view that bribery is wrong, while others will view it less strictly, since it will be

beneficial to them, while they engage in them.

Nevertheless, a substantial fragment of the social norms when adhered to by social groups,

will facilitate cooperation and good order, otherwise the social group will disintegrate.45 To

buttress this point Seuma Miller et al propose that:

In contemporary societies, social norms are in large part enshrined in the criminal law.

Theft, fraud…are actions which violate social norms in contemporary societies,and they

are also criminal acts.Indeed, it is because these acts are held to be profoundly morally

wrong that perpetrators are held criminally liable.46

What do we mean by social norms? Social norms in the sense used here, are all moral norms,

which are types of actions, or inactions that are widely believed to be morally right. A concept

45 Seumas, M, Peter, R and Edward, S., Corruption and Anti-Corruption: An Applied Philosophical Approach,p2446 Seumas, M, Peter, R and Edward, S., Corruption and Anti-Corruption: An Applied Philosophical Approach,p.24

26

of a corrupt action will be an action that is corrupt relative to the person and sets of

circumstances, surrounding the person.47

These norms constitute the basic framework within which individuals, groups, and

organisations interact in the various spheres of activity and thereby lead their individual and

collective lives. Such framework provides a moral environment, including compliance with

basic social prohibitions on theft, fraud…without which social life will collapse.48 Individuals

will conform to social norms because they believe that others do them and for that they ought

to do what others are doing, unless they want to be held criminally liable for wrong actions.

Hence taking bribe is a violation of social norms that are able to bring feelings of shame to the

person engaging in it. This framework of shame and all other compliance with basic social

prohibitions in the social life of the people will bring about a proper integration in the society,

and help control corrupt practices. But then, Miller et al enunciate that within this moral

environment exist various conditions that will facilitate corrupt practices in the society.

The first condition according to Seumas Miller et al is conflict and factionalism. Seumas

Miller et al identifies that conflict-ridden societies are always prone to corrupt practices and

often provide fertile ground for corrupt practices. This is always the case as a result of

inadequate system of social values that is complied by all or that is operational to combat

corruption. Here, the members of the groups comply with social norms only when it suits

them for their personal goal and with regard to one another in the same social group excluding

other people that don’t belong to their group.49 Communities under this condition, where there

is high level of conflict tend to commit a lot of morally wrong actions like bribing anyone in

position of authority in order to protect their interest, without considering the consequences of

their actions. In fact, for them, what they hold as morally right are all those beliefs held by

their own group even when it does not favour the general public. They justify their actions

therefore; with their belief system and the interests their groups have for their very own

sustenance. Therefore, the interest of their group, which often times turn to be detrimental to

the entire society, becomes of paramount interest to them. This then constitutes a conducive

condition for acts of corruption.

47 Seumas,M, Peter,R and Edward,S.,Corruption and Anti-Corruption: An Applied Philosophical Approach,p.2548 Seumas, M, Peter, R and Edward, S., Corruption and Anti-Corruption: An Applied Philosophical Approach,p.2449 Seumas,M, Peter,R and Edward,S.,Corruption and Anti-Corruption: An Applied Philosophical Approach,p.31

27

A Second condition capable of favouring corrupt practices like bribery is an Unjust and

unequal system of wealth and status.50 This is a problem highlighted because differences in

wealth and opportunity are often perceived as unfair and undermining the common good of

any society; People often justify their corrupt actions also on the basis that they are politically

and economically marginalised and thereby poorly treated in the way resources are

distributed. Thus, taking a closer look at the situation in some developing countries in Africa

where inequality in the way wealth, power and resources are distributed, and how unjustly

and unfairly people are affected by them, we will find a situation whereby people will do all

kinds of wrong acts to uplift and improve their economic and social condition. Often time’s

people have to offer gifts to people in position of government to get some benefits, which they

may or may not be entitled to meritoriously. Habitually engaging in the act of bribery, corrode

the social norms and moral principles that guide the society and this will inevitably undermine

the political process.

Thirdly, Moral confusion51 which involves a combination of confusion in relation to moral

beliefs about what is right and wrong, and a tempting opportunity to do wrong always will set

in, as a result of some of these conditions for corruption. Moral confusion manifests as strong

barriers to ethical actions, implying that there is a tempting dilemma to do wrong consistently,

in an environment characterised by inequality and injustices in the way wealth is distributed.

Fourthly, Miller et al identifies imbalance of power as a conducive condition for corrupt

practices. They posited Lord Acton’s statement that “Power corrupts and absolute power

corrupts absolutely” to explain their position. They give instances of autocratic political office

holders and heads of state that have used their political position in the past to abuse the rights

of citizens, as they sought for power and fame. These abuses according to these authors

portray the importance of limiting and separating power.

Miller et al also identified abuses of power, position and influence, by the rich and powerful

nations when world trade agreements are made to favour the interests of the rich and powerful

at the expense of the powerless and poor nations. They however conclude that perhaps the

level playing ground often talked about, especially when issues of “global justice” is

discussed, could be a self serving myth fabricated by powerful multinational companies and

government of the developed western nation to further their political and economic interest.52

According to Miller et al, institutions in the society, (whether political or civil),

50 Seuma,M, Peter,R and Edward,S.,Corruption and Anti-Corruption: An Applied Philosophical Approach,pp.3151 Seuma,M, Peter,R and Edward,S.,Corruption and Anti-Corruption: An Applied Philosophical Approach,pp.31-3352 Seumas,M, Peter,R and Edward,S.,Corruption and Anti-Corruption: An Applied Philosophical Approach,p.34

28

organisations(whether public or private),Individual(whether occupying public or private roles)

in the society, will constitute and contribute to the imbalance of power that are testimonies to

corrupt practices in the society, if they become corrupt and abuse their roles.

This abuse can be witnessed when the desire for wealth acquisition sets in, the moral virtues

that help to restrain persons from morally wrong acts and being prudent erode, leaving an

individual vulnerable and susceptible to Abuse of power. This condition turns to lack of

discernment and into a source of moral confusion, bringing about various acts of corrupt

behaviours, like bribery.

All these factors could turn to be justifying reasons for individuals to engage in bribery to

promote their interest, since they view these conditions as injustices imposed on them by the

society. Indeed the damage caused by such ground of justification is enormous on the society,

because it undermines the process of governance and brings about moral decadence.

2.4 SUMMARY:

In this chapter I have tried to formulate a just political structure to see how this can be

corrupted. I have shown also the characteristics of the legitimate political structure, and the

meaning of justice, which is the goal a legitimate political structure, seeks to achieve. I have

based my argument on John Rawls ideas of justice and legitimate political structure which are

vivid in his two great works: The Law of Peoples and Theory of Justice, since the realization

of a just society will necessitate the proper distribution of wealth and resources that should be

paramount in the activity of political institutions. In order to achieve this, the legitimate

political system must strive to be trustworthy and exhibit transparency in its activities and

dealings with the public to ensure that the principles of justice are fully integrated into the

political structure I also looked at the conditions that are conducive for corrupt practices from

Seumas Miller et al’s perspective as I try to analyze them and relate them to developing

countries in general.

In the third Chapter, I will focus on the moral implication of corrupt practices in general, and

bribery in particular, using three moral arguments as an evaluative tool to show claims why

corrupt practices are morally bad, since they undermine the legitimate political structure of

society. I will do this to justify my position that a corrupt practice like bribery as seen in the

political institution is morally bad, and should be combated if not completely eradicated.

29

CHAPTER THREE:

3.0 MORAL IMPLICATION OF POLITICAL CORRUPTION:

In this chapter, I will take a normative approach to my discussion against corruption. I will try

to use the three ethical positions, namely, Deontological argument, Utilitarianism, and Virtue

ethics as an evaluative tool for my claims against corruption in general and bribery in

particular to find out what should be obtainable in the moral environment. I will argue,

judging from my discussion so far, that corruption under any circumstance would not be

justified, as they have bad effect on the moral character of persons, and violates legitimacy of

institutions.

3.1 DEONTOLOGICAL ARGUMENT:

There are norms that guide and protect the citizenry, which everyone may collectively accept.

An acceptance of this fact presupposes that human societies are guided by moral principles,

and that an infringement of these moral principles or values politically, under certain

circumstances constitutes political corruption. This is seen vividly in cases that relate to duties

that attach to political roles to which special powers are involved and in duties entrusted on

one to perform on behalf of others. It is understood that, political office holders occupy

positions of trust and have duties to the people, which other people who do not occupy such

positions do not have. These political offices go with powers and authority, which arise, from

the political structure, the laws and the principles guiding the society. The powers constitute

that of enacting and executing laws by the executive; making laws by the legislature and that

of interpreting laws by the judiciary.

Naturally, there is the tendency that there will be an abuse of such powers that accompany

these political roles in the society, based on condition found in societies which might favour

such abuse. The abuse of political powers can be witnessed for instance in the infringement of

rights of citizens. Rights properly understood here points to the dispositions that are naturally

and morally associated with human beings as rational animals. They are claims that individual

citizens in the society exercise towards each other. Thus, the target of such a claim can be

registered towards another person, a group or the community or even the political authority.

Be that as it may, corrupt practices as evidenced in the political system, in relation to moral

30

principles and laws guiding the society, will consist of a violation of natural right to life,

property and basic human needs. For Seumas Miller et al, therefore, such corrupt practice

constitute a violation of the Categorical imperative proposed by Immanuel Kant53

Categorical imperative by Immanuel Kant emphasizes acting in accordance to a moral

principle that would be universally accepted in all places and at all times without exception.

Kant stipulates that people must act according to rules that they can at same time “will” as

universal principle. People must act in a way that their actions would become a universal law,

and treat humanity as an end and never as means. Emphasis will be on the need to respect

persons for themselves and not simply for what they can do for us. Kant designed the

Categorical imperative to show clearly that treating people wrongly with the intention of

advancing ones self-interest will be morally wrong.

Based on Kant’s argument, political office holders should not engage in bribery, which

involve cheating and deception. If they want to justify their corrupt beheaviours, they have to

question the act by asking themselves, the outcome of a situation whereby every member of

the society engages in corrupt beheaviour. This will result to a hostile and morally depraved

society being created, which will bring about the collapse of the legitimate political system

and every other institution in the society. There is a moral duty for political leaders therefore,

to exhibit proper moral beheaviour for the sustenance of the legitimate political system, which

will benefit all.

3.2 UTILITARIAN ARGUMENT:

Utilitarianism consists of two doctrines; a theory of what is good, and a theory of what is

morally right. Utilitarian theory of what is right is Consequentialism, or the theory that

morally right option in any circumstance is that option which brings about the most good or

the best consequence; any other option is wrong. Thus utilitarians refer to the “optimific”

alternative as an option that brings about the best consequences, or maximizes the good;

hence the right option is the optimific option.54

Utilitarianism as a political and ethical doctrine that is comprehensive stipulates that what

makes actions morally right or wrong is determined by the utilitarian standard, and through

these standards we are able to envisage governmental systems, institutions and laws that are

53 Seuma,M, Peter,R and Edward,S.,Corruption and Anti-Corruption: An Applied Philosophical Approach,pp.64-6554 Available at: http://web.missouri.edu~philrnj/utilnote.html visited on 18th May 2006

31

just or unjust. Thus when Rawls discusses the basic structure of society as evidenced in

government that is legitimate and just in his political theory, he is thus concerned with

political structure of society.

The question we need to ask then is; what really constitute human well being or welfare? Is it

pleasure, wealth and so on? Again what things should we evaluate using the consequentialist

standard? Is it particular actions, rules and character traits, institutions and so on? Even

though the utilitarian’s disagree about these, they still agree that what makes an action right is

the outcome, which is the best consequences, and that human well being constitute so many

parts that come together in association with welfare. On these two bases, therefore, any

political institution found to be engulfed in bribery as an abuse of power, will be judged

morally wrong on the basis that it results in bad consequences for the greatest number of

people in the society, since the corrupt political institution will tend not to promote the

welfare of the majority of people.

As witnessed in many corrupt developing countries, like Nigeria the utilitarian would argue

that political corruption is unethical because it results to poverty, untold hardship and in a

reduction of overall utility for the greatest amount of the people in the country. The impact of

bribery on the electoral system of any country, for instance results to an erosion of basic

moral principles and values, which leave the society in a vulnerable condition in accepting

morally bad practices that are also unlawful. For the utilitarians, bribery and all its effects,

violate “the essence of legitimately instituted systems of governance that is set up for the

proper conduct and management of the society’s affairs for a good life for the citizenry”. It

also militates against the proper production and distribution of the society’s resources in the

course of the people’s social existence.55

A Utilitarian like, Peter Singer will argue that justice demands that the welfare of every being

be maximized. His work emphasizes that what matter is people’s welfare.Thus, underlying

Singer’s moral theory is a commitment to moral equality, which requires that principles of

justice incorporate everyone’s utility.56 Singer’s statement implies that, as long as bribery

does not promote human well-being or welfare, then it is morally bad.

55 Heywood, A., Key Concepts in Politics,Macmillian Press Ltd.,pp.35-3756 Singer, P., Practical Ethics, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1979, pp.14-23

32

3.3 VIRTUE ETHICS: HARM TO MORAL CHARACTER:

This moral subject of philosophy is connected with practical issues about the right

beheaviours. Virtue ethicists realising the importance of the role of the person in ethical

decision-making, argue that individuals with high moral character are more likely to make

wise choices.57 Whereas deontological and consequentialist arguments concern themselves

with the right action, virtue ethics concern’s itself with the good life and what kinds of

persons people ought to be. The virtue ethicists will ask, “What is the right action?” which is a

different question to ask from “How should a person live? Or what kind of person should a

person be?” Whereas the first type of question deals with specific dilemmas, the second is a

question about life. Thus, instead of asking what is the right act here and now, virtue ethics

asks what kind of person one should be in order to get actions right all the time.58 The answer

to how one should live, lies in the fact that one should live virtuously, that is, have a virtuous

character, a good life and a habit of values that are attached to personal relationships and

friendship that extends to the general public.

The Aristotelian understanding of character and virtue inspires modern virtue ehicists, most of

whom formulate their ideas in accordance with Aristotle’s idea. Aristotle based the character

of the ideal person on the state of being of the person, which is all about having the

appropriate inner states or character. The virtue of prudence for instance, for Aristotle will

include the right sort of emotions and inner states, to act prudently with respect to right

feelings towards the welfare of others in the society. Aristotelian character as witnessed in the

virtuous person is all about doing, and a doctrine of action, which is not just any kind of

action, but right actions, since having the virtuous inner dispositions will also involve being

moved to act in accordance with them. A person for instance, realizing that prudence is a

good, responds to a situation and feels kindly disposed always to doing good things.

Another important feature of virtue ethics is that character traits are stable, habitual and

reliable dispositions. If an individual possesses a character of prudence, he or she will be

expected to act prudently in all sorts of situation, towards all kinds of people and over a long

period of time, even when he finds it difficult to do so, thus he can be relied upon to act

prudently, consistently over a period of time.

57Hackman,M.Z and Johnson,C.E. Leadership: A Communicative Perspective,4th Ed.Waveland Press,Illinois,2004,p.32658 Available at: X:\Virtue Ethics [Internet Encyclopaedia of Philosophy].htm visited on 18th May 2006

33

Following from all we have said so far, the act of leadership and governance entails ethics

because leaders have responsibilities towards the citizenry who voted them into power. Thus,

people in political position often bring about changes in character that would ordinarily not

occur without their presence and actions. In other words they influence a lot in the system and

in the lives of all those who elected them into power. The responsible leader according to the

ethics of responsibility would attend to the consequences of his actions, since the capacity to

live up to promises, obey the law and follow directives rests upon the primary moral capacity,

choices and judgements he make. People in position of power have the moral obligation to

control their passions and not fall into temptations, of acquiring resources meant for the

common good for their own personal aggrandisement. We should therefore have in mind that

without basic disciplines, like prudence leaders will have the tendency of abusing the power

entrusted to them. To possess a virtue like prudence means that a person’s emotion and

perceptions are trained and aligned with moral purposes so that they support rather than

subvert responsible judgements and choices.

Before I summarise, it is important to note this controversial stand of the Utilitarian as regards

bribe given for the “good” of the individuals within, a political structure that is not considered

legitimate. This argument goes a long way, trying to justify the reason for bribery in a

particular context. The utilitarians would argue considering the case of an illegitimate political

system that, there could be a “good” manifest in an act of bribery exhibited in certain

contextual illegitimate conditions. Actions such as bribery, given to a government office

holder who has no morally legitimate basis for his existence will not be seen as morally bad,

for it will be clearly overridden by some claims, one of which could be that of defending the

right to life and survival of the persons who offered the bribe, knowing full well that the

office holder has no moral basis for being in that position. The utilitarians or consequentialists

will argue that if bribery will be the best option, which will bring about the best consequence,

especially in that illegitimate political structure, then bribery will be the optimific option. This

reasoning according to the utilitarians will then, constitute a moral standard that will make the

act in this sense, a morally right action. However, looking at the deontological argument, we

will deduce the fact that, corrupt actions like that of bribery undermine the social norms and

moral principles that regulate the lives of the people.Intutively, it is assumed and taken for

granted that there exist a tendency that abuses will be witnessed in political institutions,

composed of rational human beings as regards to abuses of political powers that accompany

political roles, in many human societies. Therefore, acting in a way of giving bribery for

instance, will contravene the categorical imperative of Immanuel Kant, since one will be

34

using other people as means to his or her ends. Treating people wrongly, by using them as

means to advance ones end, is morally wrong, for such action does not portray a respect for

human life. Again, bribery is not acting in accordance to rules and laws that we can at same

time “will” to be universal principle, such moral principles that will be acceptable to all

rational human beings.Therefore, corrupt practices in form of bribery will contravene the

categorical imperative according to Kant.

Again, considering the virtue ethics emphasis on moral character as a determining factor for

ethical-decision making, we can argue that justifying the act of bribery on the basis of the

condition of the political institution; will have a corrupting effect on the moral character of

individuals living in the society or on the office bearer. The virtues, like that of prudence and

honesty, that ought to be imbibed for the good of the individual and the society in general will

be eroded, thereby creating a susceptibility in people to tend towards corrupt behaviours that

will disintegrate the whole social life of the people. On the same note, bribery will also violate

the legitimate character of all the other spheres of activity that are witnessed in the society as

it permeates the political structure, tending also to despoil and disintegrate the entire political

structure.

On these grounds, I argue that, the “optimific option” according to the utilitarians,or in other

words the best consequence which maximizes the general good ,will rather be to desist from

acts of corruption, like bribery so that utility of the generality of the people could be

maximized to a certain level in such an illegitimate environment.

SUMMARY:

I have argued in this chapter using the normative approach to show the moral implication of

corrupt practices especially that of bribery as it undermines the political institution, which

ought to be legitimate. I have analyzed the problem with corruption in general and bribery in

particular in order to find moral justifications for and against it. I started this process by

proffering three ethical arguments as analytical tools for my discussion. I finally arrived at a

conclusion that under no circumstance can acts of corruption be justified.

In the next chapter, I will look at the political structure of Nigerian government so far, and

how corrupt practices affect the electoral system of the country. Thus, this has so far

constituted a moral dilemma in Nigerian politics, as politicians tend to rationalise the reasons

for engaging in corruption.

35

In arguing along this direction, my purpose therefore, is to find a justificatory basis or grounds

for foreign aid to Nigeria, which I will try to answer in section 4.4, using the nationalists’

perspective.

36

CHAPTER FOUR

4.1 POLITICAL STRUCTURE IN NIGERIA:

The fact that Nigeria is a relatively young country, gaining its independence in 1960, means

that establishing the government’s legitimacy will be a challenging priority, considering the

entire political and economic trauma the country has passed through, over the years, in the

hands of corrupt military and civilian rulers. A brief analysis of the social effects of a very

long military rule in the country provides a good understanding of the current socio- political

and economic realities of Nigeria. At one point in the country’s existence, it was thought that

the office of the head of state was the highest position any military officer would attain, as the

military enjoyed their unchallenged rule over the country for almost twenty-six years,

constituting a two-third of the forty-six years of indigenous rule in the country since

independence. Bearing in mind that an intercourse between the military and the civil society,

in the early stages of the country’s existence after the dreadful civil war in 1970, combined

with oil boom prosperity, in the late 1970’s, constituted more to Nigeria’s political

corruption.59 The later stages of the country in the early 80’s and late 90’s in the hands of

three notable military dictators saw the country brutalised with corruption, inequalities and

increased poverty. The military generally, left a distorted legacy to the country. An experience

that was characterized by dictatorship, anarchy, and lack of accountability mechanism. This

situation resulted in alienation of Nigerian citizens further from their leaders and government,

resulting to loss of trust and confidence in the political system.

This condition as can be deduced is the environment the present democracy, under the present

democratic dispensation operates. It is a condition that has placed the legitimacy of the

present democratic government that took power on the 29th of May 1999, currently

questionable, with many citizens having little or no trust in the leaders’ abilities to run an

efficient or trust worthy society. 60

Earlier, the British Colonialists also contributed in no small measure to the political instability

and corruption in the country, as it is witnessed today. It is believed that the British created

59 Available at: www.myheritage.org visited on 19th of May 200660 http://www.nationsencyclopedia.com/World-Leaders-2003/Nigeria-POLITICAL-BACKGROUND.htmlvisited on 5th May 2006.

37

tension, resulting to lack of agreement that worked against the democratic structure they put

in place, as their legacy after independence in 1960. It is held that the British trained Chieves,

who were then, traditional rulers in the pre colonial era, to help them operate their government

in order to reach their economic goals. Whereas in Britain, the rights of people and the market

economy check the government’s power, no such checks were evidenced in Nigeria towards

the chieves that were instituted to oversee the affairs of the people by the British. Thus, it

constituted a tendency for these local rulers to think about their personal benefits while

governing the people, instead of the general good of the whole community. This practice set

in place the disposition in people to passively accept the actions of their rulers no matter the

consequences of such actions on the social life of the people. At this period, the indigenous

leaders lost touch with the communal traditions and norms that govern the community in the

interest of the whole community. Individualism sets in, resulting into a kind of rule for

personal gain, which has never been experienced in the country before. 61

Another important feature in the Nigerian political structure is the factor of Patron-client

relationship, commonly known as “God fatherism” in the country. This is the practice of

exchanging political and economic favours amongst patrons and their clients, which is always

associated with corruption. Here, the patron (or political leader) builds loyalty amongst his

clients (close associates) by granting them favours that are denied others, who do not belong

to the same ethnic group, political party or group of friends. For instance, in Nigeria, in

exchange for support, the president may grant to his supporters a portion of the oil revenue or

contract in order to gain important favour from them, like their support in elections. Often

patrons are mostly linked to clients by ethnicity, religion or on political party basis. Emphasis

is always on ethnic criterion because Nigeria is made up of 250 diverse ethnic groups that

often struggle for political identity and autonomy. This condition, seen in patron-client

relationship often leads to victimization of one group by another as one group will do

anything within its reach to attain their aim, thereby violating Kant’s categorical imperative,

as they use others as means to their ends. A victimization that might lead to exclusions in the

distribution of wealth and power in the country.

Let me now discuss how corruption undermines growth and development of the political

structure of Nigeria and how they undermine all other institutions found in the country.

61 http://www.nationsencyclopedia.com/World-Leaders-2003/Nigeria-POLITICAL-BACKGROUND.htmlvisited on 5th May 2006.

38

Corrupt practices in Nigerian political structure, (The political structure we have discussed so

far) are often associated with conflict between traditional values and imported norms,

witnessed in the colonial era. We can identify this in modernistic acquisition tendencies, as

regards financial and other material benefits. The authoritarian nature of the colonial political

order produced local political individuals that had little or no interest in the affairs of the local

people in the country. Even though these products of British political regime mobilized

people for political independence, in the post colonial era, they also inflamed ethnic

sentiments and acquisition tendencies of money and property.

Many of these local political elites resolved to an extended family assistance as a way of

alleviating the economic problems of their loved ones. Generally, this high community spirit

necessitated a situation whereby all those who are financially better placed are responsible to

use their resources to assist other people in their community. A condition which determines

the political assistance and support; and even the social status the elites are entitled to in the

community. A successful member of the community is not only expected to give gifts, but

also is looked upon to embark in projects that are beneficial to his or her people.

The act of giving gifts in Nigeria, signify gratitude for favours received, which may take the

form of money, property and so on. It shows a manifestation of gratitude on the side of the

person that received the favour or on behalf of the receiver by a loved one. Thus, a contractor

who gets a contract from a government official might decide to take gifts to the politician who

was so helpful to him securing the contract. In some other case, giving of gift could be done

while anticipating a favour in return, which could be seen in instance of contractors going to

government officials who are supposed to be responsible for issuing them contracts, with gifts

to reciprocate the favour made to them often engender aspects of support for one who has

given the gift. Here, the receiver is expected to offer some kind of favour in return.

In the next section I will see how this corrupt practice permeates into the electoral system of

the country, causing chaos, anarchy and loss of interest by the people in the system.

39

4.2 CORRUPT PRACTICES AND THE NIGERIAN ELECTORAL SYSTEM:

It is commonly understood that the major functions of political parties in modern democracies

include the mobilization of voters in support of political agendas; the selection of candidates

for public office; and the organization of election campaigns. To win a majority of seats and

control government, parties compete with each other for votes in the country.

In Nigeria, election campaigns are costly, and involve a lot of financing. This is because

Nigeria as it where, operates a multi party system, of which the main parties are the Peoples

Democratic Party (PDP) and the All Nigerian Peoples Party (ANPP).

Elone J.Nwabuzor describes the electoral situation in Nigeria when he postulates that:

During the April 2003 Federal and state elections, 30 political parties were registered

following the Supreme Court’s ruling on the law governing party registration.

Financed partly by government and partly by huge individual donations, party

politics and elections have now become both rancorous and corrupt. Allegations of

massive rigging attended the recent elections.62

Corruption is witnessed because, the Parties and their candidates need money to operate, to

print posters, brochures and leaflets, or to pay TV and radio commercials to make their

agenda or Manifesto publicly known to voters. They have to pay staff, pay for equipment to

organize and run campaigns, and finance campaign-related travel of candidates and party

leaders. In their struggle to succeed, individual candidates and party leaders are willing to

accept payoffs or illegal monies offered by wealthy donors in exchange for promises of future

favours. Many of these “money bags” are therefore tempted to spend as much money as

possible on party campaigns, often in excess of official campaign spending limits. Therefore,

to fill their campaign proposals, some political parties in the country not only accept

donations from wealthy donors or from the business community, but often extort money from

individual candidates, who need to bribe their way into such parties to be able to be eligible to

participate for elections. While the payment of money to one’s own party can be seen as a

politician’s legitimate support for building a strong party organization, and thus investing in

the party’s future, they come close to corrupt practice and extortion when they are demanded

in the context of a prerequisite for a candidate’s selection and nomination for national or

62www.globalintegrity.org/2004/country.aspx?cc=ng&act=ia visited on 20th May 2006

40

regional elections or as the “price” for a promising ranking on a party’s list of candidates.

Therefore, it is a morally wrong practice, which is always the case in Nigeria, when party

leaders extort money from candidates by threatening to remove their names from the party

list, or to assign them to a less secure constituency, or if they offer to switch names on the

party list in return for bribes. We can also consider it a wrong practice when party leaders

demand bribes from party members as a prerequisite for promotion within the party hierarchy

or for eligibility for party leadership.

A fact to be noted is that, many politicians before being accepted into these parties to be

nominated for electoral offices have little or modest income, but when elected they become

owners of properties around the world and operators of huge bank accounts all over Europe

and America. Income often seen to be accumulated through bribery and other related corrupt

practices. This is why in September 2005; a State Governor in Nigeria was caught with close

to one billion Pounds (£1b) at the Heathrow Airport in London, in a bid to launder the money.

He was remanded in prison and was awaiting trial. News had it that he manoeuvred himself

out of the prison by impersonating to be a woman to get himself out of Britain. Till today

nothing has been heard about the money and the said Governor even though he was

impeached, has not been duly prosecuted. 63The governor in question is known to be a one

time inspector of police under a meagre salary, before he took up the position as the first

governor, of the newly created state, that is still very much underdeveloped judging from the

standards of the other states created before it in the country. This man chose rather to exploit

the resources of the state, under his leadership.

As events unfolded, in 1999, a whooping sum of eight hundred and fifty thousand naira

(850,000 naira) about US$6000 was allegedly given by the President to each of the senators,

as bribe in exchange for their votes, for the election of the choice of the President, as the

senate president. This president before election lives on pensions from the military an

institution he retired from as a head of state. He is alleged to merely own a meagre

agricultural farm in a remote village in his home town, but has grown rich serving the country

as the President.

Again, in the year 2003, a supposedly appointed Minister of the Federal capital territory

Abuja, accused the senate of demanding fifty four million naira bribe money, from him, about

US$393,000, if he wished to be cleared for the ministerial appointment, since he will still

63 Available at: http://www.gamji.com/archive/archive.htm visited on 22nd May 2006

41

recuperate the money when he assumes office. But the investigation into the matter ended

with no prosecution.64

In July 1999, the News of bribery, fraud and forgery came up committed by the speaker of the

house of representative, an institution responsible for the making of laws and representation

of political constituencies in the country. Through fraudulent practices, like bribery, he

amassed wealth working for a governmental pubic sector, and bribed his way to become the

speaker of the House of Representatives, the country’s fourth highest position. This politician

does not even possess a secondary school certificate and was alleged to have forged a degree

certificate from University of Toronto Canada to become a speaker of the house of

representative.65

On the 16th of May 2006, the plans of the President were foiled by the National Assembly,

which failed to adopt a bill for the third term bid of the President for the Presidency. It was

alleged that the President offered each and every one of the legislators previously a 50 million

naira bribe package if the bill is passed to allow him contest for the third consecutive term. On

that fateful day, the National assembly rejected the bill and foiled his ambitions to contest.66

Corrupt practices such as these, in the electoral system keep undermining the nascent

democracy in that it subvert’s formal processes. It reduces accountability and distort’s

representation in policy making; and further compromises the rule of law and unfair provision

of social justice and welfare. They erode the institutional capacity of the government to

provide for the people, the basic necessities of life, as procedures are disregarded, resources

are taken out of the country, and bribes are offered for governmental offices.

Election rigging and Vote-buying are also manifestations of corrupt practice in the area of

electoral institution. In developing countries, like Nigeria where patronage is an important

social factor, voters always expect presents and gifts from parties and candidates prior to

elections and then base their decision on the basis of the quality of such gifts. Once such a

tradition has been established, voters are always demanding gifts in exchange for votes. In

Nigeria vote buying and election rigging has been a major problem for years, and it is still a

widespread practice despite repeated reform efforts. In the 1999 and 2003 elections, parties

and candidates tried to buy individual votes or votes of whole communities. In return, party

64 Available at: http://www.globalintegrity.org/2004/country.aspx?cc=ng visited on 20th May 2006.65 The News, July 11th 1999: The Face of a Liar visited on 20th April 200666 Daily Sun,17th May 2006 available at: http://www.nigeriannewspapers(Read them online); Nigerian News, World, Africa-Nigeria News Flash.htm visited on 18th May 2006

42

representatives would offer cash, sometimes clipped to campaign literature, food, clothing,

and other gifts.

This is as a result of the fact that, the first elections in Nigeria in 1999 had incredibly high

stakes, and accordingly, the temptation for corrupt activities was so high. In that initial stage

of the democratic system, the party system was weak, and the relationship between civil

society and political parties was not fully established. The parties had every opportunity to

exercise their corrupt intentions through acts of bribery. For parties, like the PDP, which is the

ruling party in Nigeria, the potential rewards for victory in the first election in 1999 were very

high. The gains were seen in their untireless effort for an opportunity to lead the country’s

political and economic institutions in 2003, thus ensuring future benefits for the party’s

supporters, and the chance to enter the next elections as incumbents in that year, even though

they never fulfilled there promises to the electorates in their first tenure in government.

Given these high benefits, many Nigerian political parties faced increased enticements to

engage in bribery, as some collaborated with the PDP to take over power at all cost. These

other parties’ supporters invested as much money as possible to make sure that the winner of

the first election which is the PDP will advance their own interests as well.

Consequently, as the promotion of corrupt culture in the electoral sphere, and the influence of

party competition and party control over state institutions and society became noticed, the

more control for instance PDP had over state institutions and society; and the lower the level

of other party competing, the higher the risk became for corrupt behaviour. As PDP had a

very strong control over many national and state institutions and even occupy the seat of the

Presidency, they are often seen to abuse their influence to secure private gain for party

member and supporters.

As shown so far, in order to fully understand the weight of corrupt practices in the area of

electoral process, we have to address both political party influence and the level of political

party control over state institutions and society, and between wealth and power in the country.

This is important to understand, because most times we find a situation whereby, these

politicians justify their corrupt behaviours as being in the interest of the masses that elected

them into power. They often claim that when bribes are given, they are given in order to

achieve a good course, either to consolidate their position in office, or to achieve a quick goal

which may not come by easily.

Let us now look at the conditions that could be seen in Nigeria, which have proved conducive

to corrupt practices in the country and which has put the country into a state of moral

43

dilemma. This dilemmic condition has proved as justifying grounds for corrupt practices in

the country.

4.3 THE MORAL DILEMMA IN NIGERIAN POLITICS:

I will look at some of the conditions that abound in Nigeria that favour the spread of corrupt

practices, like bribery that is so common in the country, thus placing the political system in a

vulnerable state of moral confusion. These conditions in the country have necessitated corrupt

actions that corrode the social values in the country; infringe the people’s right for social and

political justice; and contribute to breakdown of the laws of the country; as the code of

conduct67 for political office holders is no longer strictly adhered to. Hence Nigeria as a

democratic country is suffering series of problems in her political life, which has affected the

economy drastically, as she tries to combat these problems by embarking on several reform

strategies.68

No matter how we may look at the problems with bribery and the apparent conditions that

promote such practice, the reason for corrupt behaviour may not deviate significantly from

cultural considerations, values and the poor political culture in the country; an obsession for

material things; compulsion for a shortcut to affluence; and exhibition of ill gotten wealth by

the general public are all judged among the reasons for persistence of corrupt practice in the

country.69It is commonly believed that the social value for good life in modernistic Nigeria is

flamboyant living and affluent consumption of common good by politicians, who find

themselves in governance. They privatize the public good for their personal purposes. A

condition which makes Nigeria a society where the government overlooks its role and

responsibility to the people; a country where hard work in public and private institutions are

not rewarded adequately, while glorifying corrupt individuals. Infact, the moral principles that

used to be regarded as important and extolled in the society are gradually eroding. Priorities

are misplaced and the social values are being set wrong. Onalaja et al enunciates that the

67 Available at: http://www.nigeriaworlddocuments (Code of Conduct for Ministers and Special Advisers to the Federal Government of Nigeria).htm visited on 22nd May 200668 Available at:X:\ICPC IN NIGERIA.htm visited on 22nd May 200669 Ndiulor,T.,Price,Nigeria is paying for corruption, The Guardian Online, March 17,1999

44

influence of the peer community, extended family pressures and polygamous institutions in

the country cannot be overlooked, for they contribute to the prevalence of corrupt practices.70

The influence of the family which is more often extended, help to pressurize the political

office holder to meet certain obligations even when he is not disposed to corrupt practices in

government, hence this institution is judged to undermine development. Even though the

institution of family per se is judged as an effective system in the society, but it sure tends to

obstruct the proper advancement of social good and distribution of resources. This is

witnessed when family members tend to persuade their relatives in authority to take part of

public fund that does not rightfully belong to them.71

Robert Merton thus noted the relationship between social norms, institutions and corrupt

practices when he opines that corrupt acts could be understood as motivated beheaviour to

respond to social pressures to violate the social norms that guide society and some basic

institutions, in order to meet the set goals and objectives of an assumed social group.72

Again, the acquisition tendency, imbibed through contact with western culture and capitalism

which stress financial success as an important goal, but restrict access to opportunities, has

higher capacities to political corruption in the country. As many government officials, who

were colonial products began to be achievement oriented and wealth conscious, they were

obliged to do anything, and criminally innovate new means to attain their desired aim.

Obviously there is nothing wrong with one seeking a worthy goal, but their actions became

morally wrong when within the core of those actions is found a bad intent or motivation for

bribery; and even when bad consequences emanate from such immoral beheaviour, causing

hardship to the greater part of the society.

Another condition that contributes to a moral problem to the Nigerian society is the cultural

norm of gift giving, as this traditional practice is consistently abused, and used as means of

bribing those in political positions into doing the wish of those that offer the gifts. Arguably,

the concept of gift giving is a good thing, for there is nothing morally wrong with one

reciprocating favours done to him by someone, not minding the persons position or status in

70 Onalaja, T. and Onalaja, K.How polygamy Wrecks Nigeria, Africa, CAPWONA Book, UK, 1997.71 Harrison, L.E., Underdevelopment Is a State Of Mind; The Latin American Case; University Press Of America, Lanham, MD, 1985,p.772 Merton, R.K., Social Theory and Social Structure, Free Press, 1968, pp.246-248.

45

the society. However, it has been found to be a problem when violated or habitually indulged

in with the sole intent of influencing the judgement of the person to whom it is offered.

It breeds a conducive environment for bribery in the electoral system, because it tends to

influence the judgement of electoral officers and those elected into public offices. The

common cases abound in Nigeria where communal groups politically visit the offices and

homes of elected officers with expensive gifts to get their attention into doing special favours

for their communities. This act is becoming habitual in the lives of the people, as it is

beginning to be ingrained in the mentality of the people.

I understand that if the communities know exactly that what they are doing is bribery, they

will shudder at their morally wrongful action. The act of bribery that often come in this way,

we should understand is a corrupt act that is morally pervasive in Nigeria for it cuts across

every facet of social activities especially that of the electoral system, which has the capacity

to affect every other institution in the life of the Nigerian people.

We should note that these political parties that corrupt the electoral institution, for instance are

legitimately instituted and do not exist for the purposes of engaging in corrupt activities, but

many corrupt individuals within these morally legitimate parties engage in ongoing corrupt

activity to undermine the electoral process in the country. The absence of good moral

standards in the sector of governance, necessitated mainly by long-term military intervention

in politics contributes also to the setback of good electoral process in Nigeria. If ethics

emphasizes actions and the way we carry out values, it then behoves on Nigerian politicians

to use ethical principles as morally acceptable system in decision-making. But unfortunately,

many legitimately elected political office holders in Nigeria do not have clear knowledge of

ethical demands of their position, constituting the reason political corrupt practices reach the

high and low alike, and even the senior members of the government and the legislature.

Sometimes these people frame laws and make policies to suit their private interest,

undermining the very structure of the political institution, which is the correct conduct and

management of community’s affairs, and the production and distribution of resources in the

course of social existence.73

Another point to be noted is, conflict of interest is another important factor conducive to the

moral dilemma and injustices witnessed in the Nigeria. Seumas Miller et al describe it thus;

73 Available at: www.africaeconomicanalysis.org visited on 22nd May 2006

46

A conflict of interest occurs when a person’s or a group’s self-regarding

interest comes into conflict with its fiduciary duties. Or when a person or

a group has two fiduciary roles, and the duties of one compete with the

duties of the other…conflict of interest are conducive to institutional

corruption in a variety of ways, depending on the nature of the role of

the person or group that has the conflict of interest.74

This is why in the political life of Nigeria, Politicians often find their self-regarding interests

conflicting with the duties they are supposed to perform for the people. Most times, they find

themselves occupying two or more roles in society which often conflict in their decision

making process. In the 2003 elections in Nigeria, a lot of business minded individuals voted

and dolled out money to the incumbent PDP government that had the majority of seats in the

Houses of Assembly, the Senate and the House of Representative. They gave out these

monies to secure and award themselves contracts in time to come when these politicians have

assumed office. As millions of naira was alleged to be given out by multi national companies,

like Nigerian breweries Plc, Shell Petroleum Company; other business men that owned big

companies dolled out millions of naira as well to the party for the re-election of the President.

Some state Governors that belong to PDP, also were not left out as they contributed their own

millions of naira to the party for the president’s re-election so that they will secure their

position. These monies where never accounted for as they went to private account of the

party.

Similarly, many politicians and state Governors in the country are alleged to own large scale

industries and parastatals, of which they are invisible members of the board and share holders

of the companies. They often recommend those who voted for them for contracts and

positions in those companies. Ironically, as politicians they are supposed to have a duty to

provide services to the people. But Conflict of interest shows up when these politicians use

their office to provide a questionable service to a person who they had relied upon for

contribution in their campaign days. Here, conflict of interest involves the improper use of

political office, as could be seen in cases the government has introduced or tend to introduce

laws and policies to suit their purpose, which does not benefit the citizenry, or improve the

standard of living of those that voted them into power (Note the incidence on quote 66).

74 Seuma, M, Peter, R and Edward, S.,Corruption and Anti-Corruption: An Applied Philosophical Approach,p.46

47

As we can deduce a moral dilemma sets in, as this condition brought about by conflict of

interest renders the politician’s judgment less reliable than it should be and results in a failure,

for him to properly discharge his duties.

This situation is further worsened by the fact that Nigerian political office holders are not

frequently checked properly in whatsoever manner in the way properties or establishments are

acquired which often conflict with their roles as public servants. They tend to lack adequate

judgment in cases of corrupt actions by companies; as regards to incidents of non execution of

contracts by companies, they have interest in or which they own, and in situations of failure

by such companies to be accountable to the government.

However, judging from my discussion so far, I argue that the political structure in Nigeria has

been found wanting basing my standards and criterion on the Just political structure

formulated by Rawls. The government has so far failed to elicit the trust and confidence of the

people as it has consistently failed to offer the people justice. As inequality and border

between the rich and poor is being widened, people seem to be disinterested in the affairs of

the government. The question then is where the legitimacy of the Nigerian democratic

government lies, when issues of consent and approval that are due to the government are still

questioned by the masses in Nigeria? As long as citizens in Nigeria fail to co-operate

according to their understanding of the conception of justice, agreeing and abiding by the

principles of justice as they consider them reasonable as free and equal citizen, poverty will

continue to prevail, and the democratic government in progress though legitimate, will fall

short of the legitimate standards to further the interest of the Nigerian people.

4.4 ANY MORAL JUSTIFICATION FOR FOREIGN AID TO NIGERIA? A

Nationalist Perspective.

“Developing countries made the sixth consecutive and largest ever transfer of funds to “other countries” in 2002,

a sum totaling “almost $200 billion.” Funds should be moving from developed countries to developing countries,

but these numbers tell us the opposite is happening… Funds that should be promoting investment and growth in

developing countries, or building schools and hospitals, or supporting other steps towards the Millennium

Development Goals, are, instead, being transferred abroad.”75

This statement made by the secretary General of the United Nations brings to further clarity

the fact that bad governance and policies have ruined the political system of many developing

75 Annan, K., United Nations News Centre, 30th October 2003, Available at, www.globalissues.org/TradeRelated/Debt/USAid.asp#ForeignAidNumbersinChartsandGraphs visited on 25th

May 2006

48

countries of Africa. Thus, instead of funds being applied to various sectors of the economy,

they are being taken out of the country to foreign banks, yet these developing countries

constantly demand for aid and assistance from the international body and developed countries

for their development. Hence the question has become imperative to ask, whether there is a

basis to justify the giving of foreign aid to developing countries of Africa, like Nigeria? And

secondly, if foreign aid so far given has been able to achieve the purpose for which the donors

have given them, which is for the development of these countries? But before I proceed to

answer these, I wish to introduce the reader to this topic by giving a definition of foreign aid.

Foreign aid or international aid is defined by the wikipedia, as a situation in which one

country assists another country through donation, which may take the form of money or

services. The main recipients of aid are developing countries and the main contributors are

developed countries. According to the encyclopedia, one major type of aid is “developmental

aid”, used to refer to official development assistance which is aid given by governments on

certain concessional terms, usually as simple donations. It is given by governments through

individual countries, international aid agencies, and multi- lateral institutions like World Bank

and development charities.76

Having elucidated this definition, I will like to ask why foreign aid? And why should the

developed nations be interested in giving aid to developing nations? It is pertinent to note that

human societies across the globe have progressively established closer contacts over many

centuries, which are necessitated by religious, political and social movements; like the

Church, Islam, Colonialism, Science and Culture. Recently, the pace has dramatically

increased, with the introduction of the Internet services like; cheap telephone services, e-mail

services, and computer programs. Other technological advancements in the world have also

been associated to have led to this development, such as, the invention and building of jet air

planes, huge ocean vessels (ships), rail transportation (trains), television, radio and instant

capital (money) flows to mention but a few. All these influence our values and positions,

positively or negatively in our experiences with globalization, since they result to interaction

from the west especially, to other parts of the world. Money, technology and raw materials

now move evermore swiftly across national borders, and along with products; ideas and

cultures also circulate more freely. As a result of these movements; laws, economies and

social values are now being formulated at the international level. Globalization, therefore, is

fast becoming an inevitable trend, a house-hold concept and a welcome development in this

76 www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/aid visited on 24th May 2006

49

modern era, when people are beginning to realise their interconnectedness with other people,

with their cultures and social values.77 Globalization summarily refers to the processes and

relations of social, economic, political and cultural phenomena that are transcending national

borders, which link distant places and peoples. These processes of globalization are

spontaneous rather than result of political decision.78

Thus, the issue of global justice comes into play in this trend of globalization, in the form of

global rectificatory justice and redistributive justice, as seen in redistribution of wealth and

income that is witnessed in the world. For some moral theorists, in this era of globalization

like Peter Singer and Brian R.Opeskin, the global distribution of wealth is a matter of moral

obligation, which finds its basis of obligation in the idea of humanity. The cosmopolitans like

Kok-Chor Tan will stipulate an obligation that may require people to relieve human suffering

or people in distress, irrespective of state boundaries. Peter Singer was motivated by

maximum utility and sacrifice, when he discusses ethical issues on globalisation and global

justice. This motivation he says transcends the communitarian doctrines and emphasis on

fellow co-nationals, and examines some important issues, which are basically humanitarian

that, really affect the world today. This includes the need for a widely acceptable principle of

global fairness and equality. By arguing along this direction he challenges the idea that people

should allocate aid only to those who are of the same race with them. He argued on the

grounds that, it is arbitrary to think that only those fortunate enough to be citizens of our own

community will share in our bounty.79 On another development, Kok-Chor Tan proposes

that the principles of distributive justice ought to apply equally and impartially to all persons

and ought not to be constrained by the borders of countries .He explains that cosmopolitan

Justice calls for a fundamental creation of forms of global institutions in which the basic

rights and liberties of people can be equally protected and secured, ensuring that all are

treated with equal concern .From a cosmopolitan perspective, principles of distributive justice

ought to transcend nationality and citizenship ,to apply equally to all individuals of the world

as a whole ,in that a persons legitimate material entitlements are to be determined

independently of his or her nationality and state membership .In fact, cosmopolitan Justice is

Justice without borders, citizenship or nationality, where everyone is entitled to give help to

others and receive assistance from others irrespective of country or nationality.

77 Scholte,J.A, Globalization : Available at http://www.rep.routledge.com/article/SIOISECTI Visited on 20th April 2006 78 A Lecture by Prof. Göran Collste, Linköping University, 2nd Dec., 2005.79 Singer, P. Practical Ethics, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp.171-172.

50

Having streamlined the moral basis for the dispensing and distribution of resources globally in

form of aid by these two authors, let me now resort briefly to figures to see how inequality has

grounded the existence of humanity, having in mind that my claim does not lie in the total

abrogation of aid, but how we can justify the incidence of redistribution of resources from

developed nations to the developing nations as aid, in the face of corruption, and the natural

resources that abound in those developing countries; resources that have not been so far

harnessed properly. As an applied ethics student, I cannot deny the fact that development

assistance can be worthwhile, but we have to note that aid can contribute to alleviation of

poverty in countries that have good existing policies and not just ones with weak and flexible

policies that can be manipulated easily by corrupt individuals, thereby causing massive

inequality and poverty to the populace.

In their report, the United Nations development programme in 1992 stated the inequality in

national income between states. They announced that in 1989, countries with the richest 20%

of world population had earned 82.7% of world income, while countries with the poorest 20%

of world population earned a mere 1.4%.Judging by this figure one will deduce that the

richest earned nearly 60 times the income of the poorest 20% .It should however be noted

that, for Utilitarians,like Peter Singer, these figures conceal a gross level of inequality,

because the results are based, on a comparison of average per capita incomes between the rich

and poor countries.80 Thus, Inequality has nearly doubled over the years, and beyond these

inequalities of income is the reality for a need for justice signified by these records, for the

welfare and quality of life of the poorest individuals. Again, in the early 90’s the life

expectancy of individuals in the southern Sahara (Africa) was 12 years lower than that in the

North (Western world). Infant mortality was nearly six times higher and individuals received

only one third of the schooling of those in the west.81 It has also been estimated that in the

same year, over 100 million people in developing countries were affected by famine, while

fully one quarter of the world’s population did not get sufficient food.82

Furthermore, looking at the world bank report, in 2002,an estimated number of five hundred

and eighty two(582) million poorest people in the world living in the south have an income of

$146 billion, while the richest two hundred(200) persons in the world have an income of

80 United Nations Development Programme, Human Development Report 1992,Oxford University Press, New York, 1992 p.3481 United Nations Development Programme, Human Development Report 1992,pg.3782 United Nations Development Programme, Human Development Report 1992,pg.14

51

$1042billion exceeding the income of the poorest. More than one billion (1b) people lack

access to clean water and 2.4 billion have insufficient sanitary equipment. While, 1.2 billion

People are estimated to be very poor and earn less than $1 dollar per day. Gross inequality

also is seen in the access to productive resources, where 97% of all patents belong to the

industrialized West and 90% of them are in the hands of multi national companies.

Consequently, it is shown that the poorest fifth of the world’s population had in 1990 only

1.4% of the total wealth of the, whereas in 1960 it was higher at about 2.3%.83 This additional

record goes further to support the claim that there exists a state of poverty, misery and

degradation of human life in developing countries. An experience I always have while

walking down the streets of London, United Kingdom and Linkoping, Sweden seeing

hundreds and thousands of well and over fed children, make me wonder the fate of millions of

hungry children in Africa, especially in Nigeria.

An imperative question that needs to be asked is this, will developing countries in Africa

continue to blame their political and economic problems on the former colonial powers, who

they accuse, of robbing them of their rich and natural resources? Which is part of the basis for

their justification for quest for global justice? Or is there no way Africa can find a way of

helping themselves before calling for external support? Again, can’t there be a way these

countries can harness their resources to better the lives of the people? And how can we be

guaranteed that when these aids are given in the name of global justice, that African leaders

will use them judiciouisly, considering the level of corrupt practices that have engrossed their

political system.

At this point let me look at the record of aid that has been given so far and how it has affected,

the developmental conditions in these developing countries so far, based on Philip Booth’

claims. Booth argues that, aid as a percentage of Gross Domestic Product grew continually in

Africa, from 1970 to 1995 from 5% of gross national income to 18% of gross national income

of African countries. In the 70’s aid was relatively low as a proportion of African national

income which grew at about 2% per annum. It was noticed that growth collapsed in the 80’s

whilst aid increased. Growth then came up again in the late 90’s when aid fell. Overall, from

1970 to 2000, Africa received an estimated of about $400 billion of aid, but there was little

economic progress.84 For Booth therefore, aid does not lead to growth. This conclusion by

83 Available at: www.worldbank.org/hipc/about/hipcbr/hipcbr.htm visited on 25th May 2006.84 Booth, P Aid Trade and Governance: Can we make poverty History? Available at www.iea.org.uk visited on 24th May 2006

52

him is derived from an assessment and comparison of economic growth between East Asia

and the Pacific ,and South Asia, which has many of the countries developed now, leaving

many countries in Africa yet underdeveloped. According to him a country like Nigeria which

income per head was equal to that of South Korea 50 years ago, now is just 5% of South

Korean level. Signifying that, when aid reduced in Asia and the Pacific in the 70’s the income

per capita grew. This analysis shows that growth was highest when aid fell. A worrying

phenomenon then is that till date, these results notwithstanding, African countries are still

insistent on receiving aid whereas development is still far fetched.85 Most times I listen to the

media; I hear “news” of millions and billions of dollars, Euros or pounds given to countries in

Africa as developmental aid. Let me give few examples. Recently, on the 22nd of May 2006,

the government of the Swiss confederation donated $3million aid package to Liberian

government for concrete projects in some of her cities; in Namibia, Germany committed 60

million Euros on areas of transportation natural resource management and rural development,

including land reform and promotion of the economy, and in Nigeria, the month of May 2006

witnessed Britain donating $15billion to fund education in Nigeria .All these are numerous

instances of aid funds being committed to some countries in Africa; without mentioning those

that were given in the past. In spite of all these funds, these countries’ Gross Domestic

Product still remain low, and such funds are sometimes never accounted for.

Another aspect I need to look at is the fact that some of these developing countries are very

rich in resources, even though they fail to harness them, if we take a closer look at the

situation of a country like Nigeria’s as regard to her resources. Recently the economic

intelligence unit and the World Bank stated that, Nigerian gross domestic product (GDP) at

purchasing power parity was only at $170.7 billion as of financial year (FY2005). The GDP

per head was at $692, while Nigeria is considered a leading petroleum producer and exporter,

the 12th largest producer of petroleum in the world and the 8th largest exporter. According to

this report, Nigeria has one of the world’s largest proven natural gas and petroleum reserves

and, a founding member of the organization of the petroleum exporting countries (OPEC).

Other mineral resources present in Nigeria, like coal and tin are not fully exploited yet.

Agricultural products which include groundnuts, palm oil, cocoa, citrus fruits, maize, millet,

cassava, yams and sugar cane are surplus yet they are no longer invested in. Like many

developing nations, Nigeria has accumulated a significant foreign debt. However many of the

85 Booth, P Aid Trade and Governance: Can we make poverty History? Available at www.iea.org.uk visited on 24th May 2006

53

projects financed by these debts were inefficient, bedevilled by corruption or failed policies.86

This examination of Nigeria by the economic intelligence unit and the World Bank further

buttress the fact that Nigeria as a “Nation” for instance has not fully harnessed her full

capacity, considering having all the necessary resources to get out of her present state of

poverty. Having in mind that Nigeria has not done much to alleviate the suffering of the

masses, by not putting in use the resources available to her; and considering also the level of

corruption that abounds in the country, the question then is what solution can be given to

these problems? Or which philosophical claim can we resort to as the best perspective that

will be responsible for proffering solution to these problems in Nigeria, rightly understood as

a nation? I will try to look at the Nationalists’ claims for the “uniqueness of nationhood”, in

order to see the moral relevance, of such claims to the Nigerian situation. This position is

relevant as it takes a look at the moral implications of being a member of a nation and

Contributing to it’s welfare. I will do this in order to find reasons why Africans should

improve their socio-economic conditions in general and why Nigeria as a nation should direct

her affairs properly to improve the socio-economic life of the people.

Nationalists like David Miller, have indicated the relevance of membership in a nation.

Miller in a bid to define what a nation is, proposed five characterizations of a nation, as a

community,(a)constituted by shared belief and mutual commitment,(b)extended in history,(c)

active in character,(d) connected to a particular territory, and (e) marked off from other

communities by it’s distinct public culture.87 He further expressed his claims which are

advanced in three claims: The national duties claim, the viability claim and the allocation

claim. Miller suggests that stronger formulations should be given for the meaning of nation, in

that communities living in a territory have a good claim to self determination. Therefore, there

ought to be put in place institutional structure that enables individuals to decide matters

collectively, which concern primarily their own community. For Miller there is a good claim

for the right to national self-determination and self-reliance. Miller gives a normative account

of the legitimacy of the authority of the state, by proposing the principle of nationality. He

stipulates claims that the value of being a single nation within a state is sufficient since states

have the authority to foster a common national identity and good distribution network of

resources through laws and policy making.

86 Available at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nigeria visited on 25th May 200687 Miller, D, On Nationality, Clarendon Press,Oxford,1995,p.27

54

In the “National thesis” claim, Miller affirms that individuals owe special obligations to other

members of their nation,88 as can be intuitively understood. Individuals as it were are subject

to obligations of distributive justice to other members of their nation, if they engage in a joint

co-operative system within a nation. Rawls will also defend this argument with his criterion

for reciprocity for the defense of this special obligation, by individuals to other members of

their community.89

In a bid to disprove the workability of global distributive justice, Miller argues with the

“viability claim” that global distributive justice as proposed by cosmopolitans should not be

accepted because it is not feasible. People can only adhere to a system of redistributive justice

if it is to be successfully put in place. The viability claim therefore, supports a system of

distributive justice that is based only on national communities, since that which involves

global systems of distributive justice are unworkable. Why will global system of justice not be

workable? Prof Philip Booth in a response to this argues that some developing countries in

Africa have a large percentage of their GDP coming from aid, and when this happen, people

who are talented would not pursue their self-interested wealth accumulation through

entrepreneurship and business. Rather, they would depend on obtaining the benefit of the aid

resources allocated to them through the political system, making the opportunities for

corruption very huge. Aid for him feeds corruption, and keeps the rich and powerful, rich and

powerful, as can be deduced from what is happening in the developing countries90This

consequentialist view point can be understood by saying that the effects of aid is harmful and

include a promotion of a culture of dependency and a discouragement of self reliance by

people in developing countries.

Another problem with global redistributive justice is that, it is understood to be bribes offered

by governments in developed countries to those in developing countries for political

advantage. The transfer of money and services from one government to another will perform a

function of a price paid for political services rendered or yet to be rendered. Governments

justify this form of bribery as foreign aid for economic development since money is

transferred through legitimate machinery put in place for economic aid. Governments over

88 Miller D, On Nationality, Clarendon Press,Oxford,1995,p.83-8589 Rawls, J., The Law of Peoples, pp. 132-133.(Criterion for reciprocity as Rawls puts it is understood as when a reason and belief for political power is sufficient for people to reasonably believe that they might accept such reasons reasonably. This happens when everyone in society have sufficiently fulfilled their role, and the political authority being able to fulfil its role to the people). 90 Booth, P. Aid Trade and Governance: Can we make poverty History? Available at www.iea.org.uk visited on 24th May 2006

55

time have used this legitimate means to buy political advantage from governments of

developing countries. This practice of giving bribes as though they are contributions for

development in developing countries creates in the giver and the recipient an expectation

which is often bound to be disappointing.91 For the nationalists therefore, global justice in the

form of foreign assistance will not be workable. Cosmopolitans like Thomas Pogge will argue

that moral criteria for global justice are what counts and not political policies or institutions

which are responsible to dispense them favourably.92 For Pogge, people are motivated

morally for their commitment to principles of global distributive Justice. But then, Booth will

ask, how we can accept Pogge’s argument that what really counts is the moral disposition to

commitment to cosmopolitan distributive justice ideals, and not political institutions and

structures responsible for the implementation of global justice principles. For what then, is the

need for foreign aid if it is just to enrich and help the rich and powerful, get richer and more

powerful while increasing the level of corrupt practices? What is the essence of foreign aid to

Africa, if according to Koffi Annan; the developing countries will continue to intensify their

efforts by devising new means of transferring huge sums of money meant for development or

as aid, to foreign banks instead of using them for the economic development which the

monies are meant for? The reader’s guess is as good as mine. If foreign aid to developing

countries of Africa has not been workable, since many countries of Africa have remained

poor, I think that the allocation claim posited by the Nationalists can really help to solve the

problem of corruption, and harness the available resources on ground in these developing

countries.

The “Allocation of duty” claim, stipulates that people living in the nation have the duties to

ensure that everyone receive their entitlements due to them. Nations have the special duty to

ensure that their members receive their just entitlements as can be deduced from the

cosmopolitan idea of distributive justice. Miller agrees with the cosmopolitan claim that

people are entitled to their security, liberty and subsistence, but this duty for him belongs to

co-nationals.93 Miller supports his positions that the obligations to ensure that people receive

their entitlements and promote their basic rights belong to co-nationals. He made this claim

with these propositions that, if human beings have basic rights, and individuals are under a

special obligations to their co-nationals then individuals are responsible to see to it that the

91 www.foreignaidinpoliticalsciencereviewvol56,no2,p_302.htm visited on 20th May 2005.92 Pogge, T.Cosmopolitanism and sovereignty, in C.Brown (ed), Political Restructuring in Europe: Ethical perspectives, Routledge, London, 1994 pp.89-122.93 Miller D, On Nationality, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1995, pp.74-77.

56

basic rights of co-nationals are observed. The responsibility to see that the basic rights are

taken care of rests on local communities to which the individual belongs.94 Even though

Freeman has rejected this argument on the basis that proposition one and two does not imply

the conclusion, since we can accept one and two and deny the conclusion. He further argues

that for the fact that an individual is entitled to something, does not make him (Freeman), who

has a duty to that individual to provide him with that which he is entitled to.95 But looking at

it differently, we will deduce that Miller’s argument is plausible for if individuals who have

basic rights, fulfill their obligations to other co-nationals, I think justice demands that co-

nationals owe a special duty to that individual, to ensure that he gets all his just entitlements

in the nation.I can argue that, applying the allocation claim by the nationalists to the Nigerian

situation; that Nigeria as a nation will realize that she owes her citizens special obligation to

ensure that their basic rights are protected and their just entitlements are given to them. In as

much as individuals fulfill their own obligation to their co-nationals, and carry out their civic

duties as and when due, it is the duty and responsibility of the government locally, to ensure

that members of the nation receive the entitlements due to them. In this case resources have to

be adequately distributed and harnessed for the good of the people in order to alleviate the

poverty that has pervaded the nation.

4.5 SUMMARY:

I have tried to analyze the situation in Nigerian politics, as it concerns the electoral system

and the moral problems associated with corrupt practices in the country’s political structure,

to see how the country has really fared in maintaining that legitimate character that should

characterize her activities. This is because the realization of a just society for proper

distribution of wealth and resources should be paramount in the activity of any given political

system. I also looked at the moral justification for foreign aid in Developing countries of

Africa especially Nigeria, in the face of corruption and abundant natural resources in them. I

then proffered the nationalists’ claims as a remedy for the sustenance of the natural resources

that abound in some of these developing countries like Nigeria.

94 Miller D, On Nationality, Clarendon Press,Oxford,1995,p.7595 Freeman, M., Universalism, Particularism and Cosmopolitanism Justice, in T. Coates (ed), International Justice.Ashgate, Aldershot, 2000, p.72.

57

CHAPTER FIVE

5.1 CONCLUSION:

It is ethically imperative that any discussion on corruption would necessarily start with a

moral approach in order to understand fully the moral implications of corruption and how it

occurs and affects different societies. This means that the notion of corruption will be shown

to be wider than has often been recognized, as there are differences in ways social norms and

moral principles that guide societies are practiced amongst and within societies.

I have taken a normative approach in this work by positing first, some definitions by various

authors, which I found descriptively insufficient as an ethics student to represent corruption as

a moral concept that has moral implications. Even though I will acknowledge the fact that all

the definitions represent a common feature of corruption as an abuse of public office for

private gain, that is capable of constituting harm to the public. 96 But then ethicists have

shown that corruption go beyond such claim, to include habitual wrong acts that are

performed by moral agents, which are capable of despoiling the moral character of the

individual as well as undermining the morally legitimate institution in which such actions

occur.Consequently, these wrongful acts disintegrate the political structure of the society,

which is the means to achieving correct conduct and management of a community’s affairs

and the production and distribution of resources. This problem brought about by corruption

will then intensify poverty in the society.

I have also gone further to argue that these corrupt practices always find their way into the

political sphere of the society, which is a vital institution in any country, not just for growth

and development of the economic standard of living, of the members of the society but also

for a sustainable and long lasting effect of such development. This is the reason why, when

corrupt practices cut into the fabric of any country’s political life, the effects are however

drastic, because they set back the rate development that is supposed to be achieved.

Summarily, I have used different moral arguments and principles, as evaluative tools to give a

normative account of the problem with corruption especially as it affects developing countries

of Africa, where I laid a strong emphasis on Nigeria. I further argued in this work that in no

96 Friedrich, C.J., Political Pathology, Political Quaterly, 1966-Limited Government: A Comparison, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, pp.70-85.

58

way would corrupt practices like bribery which cuts across the electoral institution of Nigeria

be justified or rationalized. Judging by the favourable conditions that warrant them in the

country. Again, I went further to enunciate that foreign assistance which is a cry by

developing countries in this era of globalization would not be justified in the face of corrupt

practices and the abundant natural and human resources that are mismanaged overtime in

these countries. The application of principles and ideas of the Nationalists are highly needed

for the promotion of national responsibility and distribution of wealth and resources in the

country. Bearing in Inequality and poverty brought about by corruption in the political system

of the country is not a product of or absence of natural resources, but differences in perception

and implementation of poor political culture and irrelevant policies in Nigeria. As long as the

country can experience a reform of her political structure based on Rawls ideas and the

Nationalists’ claims, through a firm fight with corruption, she may not be morally entitled to

foreign assistance in the form of aid.

Proper sense of national values, integrity, trust and transparency by government officials is

imperative to get problems of corruption in politics solved in Nigeria.

59

Bibliography:

1. Ball, A.R, Modern Politics and Government (4th Ed), Macmillan Education,

London, 1988.

2. BBC English Dictionary, Harper dollings Publ, 1992.

3. Chambers Dictionary: New Edition, Chambers Harvey Publishers Ltd, London,1993

4. Freeman, M., Universalism, Particularism and Cosmopolitanism Justice, in T.

Coates (ed), International Justice, Ashgate, Aldershot, 2000

5. Friedrich, C.J., Political Pathology, Political Quarterly, 1966-Limited Government: A

Comparison, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1974.

6. From a Lecture by Prof.Göran Collste, Linköpings Univ., 2nd Dec., 2005

7. Hackman, M.Z and Johnson, C.E., Leadership: A Communicative Perspective, 4th

Ed.Waveland Press, Illinois, 2004.

8. Harrison, L.E., Underdevelopment Is a State Of Mind: The Latin American Case;

University Press of America, Lanham, MD, 1985.

9. Heidenheimer, A.J., Terms, Concepts, and Definitions: An Introduction, In A.

Heidenheimer, M.Johnston, and V.Levine, Political Corruption: A handbook, New

Brunswick, NJ, 1989.

10. Heywood, A., Key Concepts in politics, Macmillan Press Ltd.London, 2000.

11. Huntington,S.P.,Political Order in Changing Societies, Yale University Press, New

Haven,1968

12. Jain, A.K, The Political Economy of Corruption (Ed), Routledge, London, 2001.

13. Miller, D, On Nationality, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1995.

14. Merton, R.K., Social Theory and Social Structure, Free Press, 1968,pp246-248

15. Ndiulor, T., Price Nigeria is paying for Corruption, The Guardian Online, March 17,

1999.

16. Noonan, J.T., Bribes, Macmillan, New York, 1984.

17. Nye, J.S. Corruption and Political Development: A Cost-Benefit Analysis,

American Political Science Review, 1967.

18. Onalaja, T. and Onalaja, K, How polygamy Wrecks Nigeria, Africa, CAPWONA

Book, UK, 1997.

19. Pogge, T., Cosmopolitanism and sovereignty, in C.Brown (ed), Political

Restructuring in Europe: Ethical perspectives, Routledge, London, 1994.

20. Rawls, J., A Theory of Justice, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1971.

60

21. Rawls, J., The Law of Peoples, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, 1999.

22. Senturia, J.A. Corruption, Political, Encyclopaedia of the Social Sciences, vol.4,

crowell-collier-Macmillan, New York, 1935.

23. Seumas, M, Peter, R., and Edward, S, Corruption and Anti-Corruption: An

Applied Philosophical Approach, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey, 2005.

24. Singer, P., Practical Ethics, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1979.

25. Tarkowski, J., Old and New Patterns of Corruption in Poland and the USSR,

Telos, 1989.

26. The Concise Oxford Dictionary of politics, Oxford University Press, New York,

1996.

27. The Transparency International Corruption Index, 1998 and 2001.

28. United Nations Development Programme, Human Development Report 1992,

Oxford University Press, New York, 1992.

61

INTERNET SOURCE:

1. Annan, K., United Nations News Centre, 30th October 2003, Available at,

www.globalissues.org/TradeRelated/Debt/USAid.asp#ForeignAidNumbersinChartsa

ndGraphs

2. Daily Sun 17th May 2006, available at: http://www.nigeriannewspapers (Read them

online); Nigerian News, World, Africa-Nigeria News Flash.htm visited on 18th May

2006.

3. http://www.transparency.org/policy_research/surveys_indices/gcb

4. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bribe

5. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_corruption

6. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legitimacy_(political_science)

7. http://www.pikolint.org/~clark/sites/trinity/nds106/trust_ia.ppt#257,7

8. http://public-services.politics.ox.ac.uk/transparency.asp

9. http://web.missouri.edu~philrnj/utilnote.html

10. http://www.globalintegrity.org/2004/country.aspx?cc=ng&act=ia

11. http://www.rep.routledge.com/article/SIOISECTI

12. http://www.nationsencyclopedia.com/World-Leaders-2003/Nigeria-POLITICAL-

BACKGROUND.html

13. http://www.nigeriaworlddocuments (Code of Conduct for Ministers and Special

Advisers to the Federal Government of Nigeria)

14. Quinones, E., What is Corruption? In the Financial, fiscal and Enterprise Affairs

Directorate, 2000 Available at,

http://www.oecdobserver.org/news/fullstory.php/aid/233/What_is_corruption_.html

15. Scholte,J.A, Globalization Available at

http://www.rep.routledge.com/article/SIOISECTI

16. www.africaeconomicanalysis.org

17. www.efcnigeria.org/publications13.html

18. www.myheritage.org

19. www.worldbank.org/hipc/about/hipcbr/hipcbr.htm

20. www.Virtue Ethics [Internet Encyclopaedia of Philosophy].htm visited on 18th May

2006

21. www.ICPC IN NIGERIA.htm visited on 22nd May 2006

62

NEWSPAPER SOURCE

1. The News, a weekly magazine (Nigeria), The Face of a Liar, July 11th 1999

63

64